Breadth or depth? A content analysis of the use of public relations theory

Sisco, Hilary Fussell; Collins, Erik L.; Zoch, Lynn M.

doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.10.006

Cited by 20 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The sample (Table 1. The volume of articles published over the time period of this study (Table 2. The proportion of articles in the sample that were coded as having theory prominent in their writing was just under 34%. This compares well with Sallot et al (2003) who found just under 20% of articles were theoretical and 22% found by both Zoch et al (2007) and Sisco et al (2011). The proportion of articles with theory prominent also compared well to related academic fields, for example, with Potter and Riddle's (2007) content analysis of journal articles concerned with mass media effects that found 35% of articles featured a theory prominently.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Everywhere and nowhere: Theorising and researching public affairs and lobbying within public relations scholarship

Davidson

2015

Public Relations Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public affairs and lobbying is a high status and strategically vital public relations specialism. It is a field of PR practice that generates high levels of both scholarly and public concern in regard to its perceived role in supporting corporate power and the associated impact on the functional legitimacy of democratic institutions. For this paper a content analysis was conducted of academic journals (between 2000-2013) to provide insights into how public affairs and lobbying have been theorised and researched within public relations scholarship and to ascertain to what degree wider public concerns have been addressed. Findings include an empirical confirmation of the low level of research activity on public affairs; that stakeholder and rhetorical theories have been the most widely used theories, but are far from constituting dominant paradigms; that scholarship has privileged functional objectives over civic concerns; and that published work originates almost entirely from institutions in Europe and the US with the Global South invisible. The paper also discusses future directions for research in public affairs and advocates the placing of discourse into definitions of public affairs, and that academic public relations should assert responsibility for this field, but in a manner that more equitably balances organisational and societal concerns. BackgroundThe centrality of the public affairs function within public relations in combination with the ongoing concerns regarding impacts on democratic decision-making, as well as popular assumptions of routinely low ethical standards present a strong normative case for this field to be a priority for theorising and research. While definitions of public affairs may still be in a state of flux, scholars who have explored this function have tended to agree on its significance as a specialism. Zetter mischievously nominated public affairs as constituting "PR for grown-ups" because of the "huge rewards for getting it right -and major consequences for getting it wrong" (2008: p. :xiii). Public affairs has been observed as higher status strategic work (L'Etang, 2008), and that specialists are more than "mere technicians" but professionals who wield influence in Part of the difficulty in defining and conceptualising public affairs as a specialism of public relations is that a considerable proportion of public affairs practice is indistinguishable from public relations activity (Somerville and Ramsey, 2012). By way of example, in written evidence to a committee of the UK parliament that was investigating the regulation of lobbying, Ed Williams then CEO of Edelman UK argued that for large agencies such as his "…public affairs is just one of many public relations services we provide to clients. The boundaries between, for example, activity which influences the political environment and activity which influences a broader media and stakeholder environment is increasingly blurred." (Political and Constitutional Reform Committee, 2012: p. 67).In most definitions public a...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Everywhere and nowhere: Theorising and researching public affairs and lobbying within public relations scholarship

Davidson

2015

Public Relations Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Based on their analysis, Botan and Taylor (2004) suggested that public relations had become ''a theoretically grounded and research-based area that has the potential to unify a variety of applied communications areas and serve different types of organizations, including nonprofit organizations'' (p. 659). Subsequent efforts by Botan and Hazleton (2006) and Fussell Sisco, Collins, & Zoch (2011) tended to confirm this trend.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…The results of this study suggest that nonprofit public relations currently lack a strong theoretical foundation. A number of scholars (Botan & Taylor, 2004;Botan & Hazleton, 2006;Fussell Sisco et al, 2011) have called for more rigor in the advancement of public relations scholarship, particularly in theory development. The findings of this study suggest that there is still a focus on introspection in the field, and no real emphasis on any one theory or consistent theoretical paradigm.…”

Section: Nonprofit Public Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Paralleling the Practice: An Analysis of the Scholarly Literature in Nonprofit Public Relations

Sisco

Pressgrove

Collins

2013

Journal of Public Relations Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although analysis of public relations scholarly literature has become an ongoing topic of investigation, there has been little examination of how different areas of public relations have been studied, and no studies specifically on the nonprofit sector. Therefore, this study investigated scholarly articles about nonprofit public relations in the top public relations and international communications journals (n ¼ 206). Employing a quantitative content analysis, we examined the selected articles in terms of theoretical perspectives, research topics, methodologies, data collection and types of nonprofit organizations. We conclude that, despite an overall paucity of published research, the last 6 years has evidenced a notable increase in the number and proportion of scholarly articles about this topic. If scholarly articles published in 2012 are any indication, then the future of scholarly study of nonprofit public relations looks to be more promising than ever.

show abstract

“…Researchers need to "work towards a consilient synthesis, that is, a theoretical framework that contains nonrelativistic conjectures about the world from a nucleus for research to accumulate around" (Nothhaft, 2016, p. 69). Since strategic communication of organizations and all the connected academic clusters have their common roots in communication (van Ruler, 2018(van Ruler, , 2016van Ruler & Verčič, 2005), communication science theories can be seen as the appropriate framework for studying strategic communication of organisations to mature as a discipline (Sisco, Collins, & Zoch, 2011). Within communication science, three major traditions of analyzing, investigating and explaining communication phenomena in society are distinguished: a social science approach towards communication, next to an interpretative, and a critical research approach (Anderson & Baym, 2004).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Back to the Roots? The Applications of Communication Science Theories in Strategic Communication Research

Lock

Wonneberger

Verhoeven

et al. 2019

International Journal of Strategic Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, the field of strategic communication has been criticized for lacking a coherent theoretical synthesis. Recognizing that strategic communication is a sub-discipline of communication science, we study how the field is anchored in the corpus of established communication theoriesincluding social science, interpretative, and critical approaches. To describe the use, development, and context of communication theories in strategic communication publications, we analyzed all articles published in ten public relations/ corporate communication/ organizational communication/ strategic communication journals over twenty years (N = 4,027). While the vast majority of articles did not refer to one of the 91 communication theories, the share of references to these theories has been increasing. Overall, we found a high diversity of approacheswith considerable differences among journalsindicating a broad discourse. However, we also found a growing relevance of the social science paradigm. We argue that a stronger focus on communication theories may facilitate a consilient synthesis and increase the relevance of the field, academically and practically. We therefore propose to strengthen the communication science perspective in strategic communication.

show abstract

Breadth or depth? A content analysis of the use of public relations theory

Cited by 20 publications

References 3 publications

Everywhere and nowhere: Theorising and researching public affairs and lobbying within public relations scholarship

Everywhere and nowhere: Theorising and researching public affairs and lobbying within public relations scholarship

Paralleling the Practice: An Analysis of the Scholarly Literature in Nonprofit Public Relations

Back to the Roots? The Applications of Communication Science Theories in Strategic Communication Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About