Body of Knowledge -- Connecting history to the future -- by Christina

It is essential to understand and encompass the body of knowledge in any communication research study. It is a fundamental component. I think the most important function of a connecting the body of knowledge to mass communication research is it gives credibility and justification for the research. A proper literature review shows that the researcher understands the history and important parts of the existing literature. All researchers must understand what came before them in order to move any research forward. The results of a research study should add to the existing body of knowledge either by proving a hypothesis or answering research questions that are a continuation of the current body of knowledge or that rebut other published research.

For example, George Gerbner, one of the pioneers in the communication field, founded cultivation theory. However, his work did not come without critics. Conducting research to refute Gerbner’s findings, were Michael Hughes and Paul Hirsch. Each believed Gerbner's research was flawed and oversimplified. A literature review covering cultivation theory would obviously cover Gerbner’s work, extensions of his work, as well as the works by Hughes and Hirsch. This is actually a fun theory, because there are many published articles with the authors arguing back and forth, from year to year. The fall 1980 Public Opinion Quarterly and 1980, 1981 Communication Research are two journal's these published arguments are found in. Also, the Media Awareness Network re-covered this debate in 1997, long after Gerbner’s passing in 1989.

I think the biggest misconception about the body of knowledge is that it is only present in the literature review. That is by far not true. I feel for research to be conducted thoroughly the researcher must also understand the history and “body of knowledge” behind research methodologies. For example Bernard Berelson and Klaus Krippendorff are two experts in understanding and conducting a content analysis. To ensure reliability and validity in conducting a content analysis, a very through understanding of the history and “body of knowledge” over content analysis must be conducted. Leaning and understanding the research over content analysis will again lend credibility and justification to the research at hand. The point here is that mass communication theories are not the only important part of the body of knowledge. Also, as our own Dr. Charles Self pointed out, the body of knowledge also comes from experts and organizations in the actual communication field, specifically for my research published work from the Public Relations Society of America and International Association of Business Communicators are included throughout my research.

There are many pros to having a vast understanding of the body of knowledge, however I cannot think of very many cons except that it only causes more work. One of the major pros is that you can find holes in the current research and it lends credibility to the research. The con is that you might and probably will find some research that does not agree with your ideas and you will have to include that research in the coverage of the body of knowledge. Using research like this is the ethical and right decision, even though you may have to note it as a potential limitation or find a way to disprove it.

Adding to the JMC body of knowledge

Adding to the JMC body of knowledge--Deb Wallevand

The "body of knowledge" is ubiquitous. The "body of knowledge" is broad. The first daunting step to take when conducting research in such a way that it connects to the "body of knowledge" in journalism and mass communication is identifying what is missing or lacking in the existing literature. Research is finding out what you do not already know. No one knows everything, but everybody knows something. By writing a literature review, the researcher can convey to the reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. Reviewing the field allows the researcher to build on the platform of existing knowledge ad ideas. Additionally, this process is important because it demonstrates that the researcher is not re-inventing the wheel (doing research that has already been done).

A literature review is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries. A good literature review requires the following attributes: the ability to conduct exhaustive bibliographic searches, the ability to organize the collected data meaningfully, describe, critique and relate each source to the subject of the research, present the organized literature logically, and last, but not least, to correctly cite all sources mentioned.

It is necessary to consult a wide range of information sources in the process of connecting to the "body of knowledge." Some of these sources include, but are not limited to scholarly journals, books, newspapers, standards, statistics, maps, and government legislation. For example, I utilize Google Scholar quite a bit to find articles regarding women's sports and the media. Not only does this allow me to find articles, but it shows me how many times a certain article has been cited. This in turn tells me if that piece of academia is considered important by those scholars who contribute to "the body of knowledge."

There are cons to doing research because it carries with it an inherent danger to those who are close minded or comfortable in their preconceptions. There are people, including researchers, who reject anything that contradicts, or at least doesn't support, their views of the world. Research may show that what you already know is incorrect. This is a hard thing to accept.

On the other hand, the pros of this process of conducting research certainly outweigh the cons. As I mentioned earlier, a literature review shows where the new research fits into the existing body of knowledge. It justifies the research. The body of knowledge is ever-evolving and it is kind of exciting to think about the fact that your work will help shape the field and the direction that it is headed. Your research may help refine, refocus or even change the field.

Connecting to the Body of Knowledge

As a graduate student, the body of knowledge daunting and even overwhelming at times, and finding your place within the vast body of knowledge can be difficult. The process of finding your place within the ominous body of knowledge you first must begin with your own interests and ideas. From there the process continues with basic research on the topics that emerged from your areas of interest.
In the beginning stages of research, I know that I was overwhelmed because though I had several ideas on research topics that I found very interesting I still wasn’t sure what I wanted to focus on. Last semester I focused on the effects thin-image media has on young girls and this semester I am focusing on brand image, but I am still not one hundred percent locked into a topic. I still struggle with this because I am doing the project option and I find it hard to decide on a research topic without knowing for certain that it will be able to be disseminated to a broader audience or a specific client and be of benefit to them. I want to do an ad campaign and that is hard to finalize your plans when you don’t have a specific client in mind.
I think that really the best way to conduct research in a way that connects to the body of knowledge in journalism and mass communication studies is to research and read past studies until you find a topic or study that sparks your interest. A good way to make your research really connect to the larger body of knowledge is to look at the limitations and suggestions for future research that is presented in past studies. A couple of good places to find scholarly articles are Google Scholar and the OU library and Lexis Nexis. This is an easy and logical way to tie your research to the basis of a past study and build off of the already known findings. It is important to connect your research to other researchers work, because the work of others provides a good foundation to build your own studies. Also connecting your work to others research is a way of validating your work and showing to readers that you are knowledgeable on the topic.
The pros of connecting your research to the body of knowledge are vast. As I mentioned earlier, connecting your research with other researchers’ work give you a good foundation for your own study. It also helps to validate your study if you use previously published or validated work to build your own study.
The cons of connecting your research to the body of knowledge are few to none. The only major con, which isn’t really a con at all, only an annoyance, is that it takes a lot of time to conduct the research. Also if your study contradicts the previous findings on a topic, you may have a much harder time getting people to accept your study as valid. Really neither of these are cons, they are just a part of the process of conducting research and writing a thesis or project.

Conducting Research

Taylor Newcomb

Of course, before anything else is mentioned, quite possibly the greatest tool in conducting scholarly research is Google Scholar. This tool opens us up to hundreds, maybe even thousands, of relevant articles and books by the scholar we prefer. It is our shortcut to the body of knowledge, in that it helps us do it from home and at our leisure instead of dealing with the time and material constraints of libraries. For those of us who want to go beyond Google Scholar into the body of knowledge, there is Journal Storage which stores articles past five years ago. This site has been most helpful in tracking down books and articles by Bernays, whom is one of the foundations of my project. 

Once, there is that connection to the sites, the body of knowledge is just a click away. Knowing what has been done before is very important to research, because if we don't take the time to learn what others have said, then we are just wasting the time of others who will come after. The literature review, which is the manifestation of the body of knowledge, is key to showing others we have connected. It shows we have conducted the research by going through journals and articles to find that one article which explains it all. The body of knowledge is the foundation upon which the rest of our project/thesis rests, in the same manner as houses and buildings. 

The pros to conducting research into the body of knowledge could be wide ranging, but I will only stick to a few. The most important pro is that it might give us new avenues through which to peer. We may be pigeonholing ourselves to one item, but then one day, bam, we find an article that switches the light on for our project and lets us go a new, better way. This would have been impossible if we failed to conduct the research. Another pro is that we know the information. By researching the reading everything we can find, then we have a step up on people who fail to do it. A third, and for this section, final pro is that it gives us guidelines for conducting future research. We read what has been done and then from that figure out what needs to be researched next and how best it could be found. 

As for the cons, it is very time consuming. One can expect to lose hours conducting this research. We have outside lives, well most of us, that can't be pushed aside for the long time needed for research. Another con is that we may hit the end of our research trail. If we run out of items to find but still need more, then we may either have to change the point of our project or go insane. I faced this last semester when I ran out of items for sports crisis communication. There was just enough for that paper, but anything beyond that was impossible. A final, for this section, con is that the research may be leading us down the wrong path. We might not know it until too late, but we may have been following the wrong avenues and guidelines and ended up with a incomplete project and a defense deadline coming sooner than we want. 

Overall, the body of knowledge is something that is important to all. It gives us foundations and avenues with which to find our route. Without that research and body of knowledge, we would just be floating aimlessly in the ocean.