Introductory models & basic concepts: Gerbner

Gerbner's General Model

Similarly to the Schramm & Osgood Circular Model, Gerbner's General Model emphasizes the dynamic nature of human communication. It also, in common with other models, such as, say, David Berlo's S-M-C-R model, gives prominence to the factors which may affect fidelity.

The model shown diagrammatically is to be read from left to right, beginning at E - Event. Please click on the model for further details.

Gerbner: E

An event takes place in the 'reality'

Gerbner: Perceptual dimension

The event (E) is perceived by M (the man (sic) or machine).

The process of perception is not simply a matter of 'taking a picture' of event E. It is a process of active interpretation (as Schramm & Osgood emphasize in their circular model).

The way that the E is perceived will be determined by a variety of factors, such as the assumptions, attitudes, point of view, experience of M. This is similar to Berlo's S-M-C-R model which draws our attention to the way that attitudes, knowledge level, communication skills, culture and social position affect the encoding and decoding of messages.

E can be a person talking, sending a letter, telephoning, or otherwise communicating with M. In other words, E could be what we conventionally call the Source or Transmitter. In this case, the model draws our attention to those factors mentioned by Berlo and is applicable to interpersonal communication.

Equally, E can be an event - a car crash, rain, waves crashing on a beach, a natural disaster etc. In this case, we could be applying the model to mass media communication, say the reporting of news.

It is this generality in the model which makes it a useful starting point for the analysis of wide variety of communication acts. Note that the model, besides drawing our attention to those factors within E which will determine perception or interpretation of E, also draws our attention to three important factors:

• Selection: M, the perceiver of the event E (or receiver of the message, if you prefer) selects from the event, paying more attention to this aspect and less to that. This process of selecting, filtering is commonly known as gatekeeping, particularly in discussion of the media's selection and discarding of events or aspects of them.
• Context: a factor often omitted from communication models, but a vitally important factor. The sound represented by the spelling 'hair' means an animal in one context, something that's not supposed to be in your soup in another. Shouting, ranting and raving means this man's very angry in one context, raving loony in another.
• Availability: how many Es are there around? What difference does availability make? If there are fewer Es around, we are likely to pay more attention to the ones there are. They are likely to be perceived by us as more 'meaningful'. What sort of Es are there - for example, in the UK's mainly Conservative press, how many non-Conservative messages are available to us?

Gerbner: E1 and M

E1 is the event-as-perceived (E) by the man (sic) or machine M. In terms of human communication, a person perceives an event. The perception (E1) they have of that event is more or less close to the 'real' event. The degree of correspondence between M's perception of event E (E1) will be a function of M's assumptions, point of view, experiences, social factors etc.

Gerbner: Means and Controls

In the next stage of the model, M becomes the Source of a message about E to someone else. M produces a statement about the event (SE). To send that message, M has to use channels (or media) over which he has a greater or lesser degree of control. [For comment on channels, see the Lasswell Formula.] The question of 'control' relates to M's degree of skill in using communication channels. If using a verbal channel, how good is he at using words? If using the Internet, how good is he at using new technology and words? And so on? 'Control' may also be a matter of access - does he own this medium? can he get to use this medium? Think of teachers in classrooms controlling the access to communication channels, parents at home, owners of newspapers, editors of letters pages etc.

Gerbner: SE

SE (statement about event) is what we would more normally call the 'message'. S stands for Signal in fact, so in principle an S can be present without an E, but in that case it would be noise only. The process can be extended ad infinitum by adding on other receivers (M2, M3etc.) who have further perceptions (SE1, SE2 etc.) of the statements about perceived events.

McQuail and Windahl (1981) suggest that the generality of the model makes it useful both for the analysis of interpersonal and mass communication. For example, on an individual-to-individual level,

it may......be useful to illustrate communicative and perceptual problems in the psychology of witnessing before a court: How adequate is the perception of witness M of event E, and how well is E1 expressed in SE and to what degree does the perception of SE1 of judge M2 correspond to SE? Where the mass media are concerned, they suggest E could be potential news, M the mass media, SE media content and M2 the media audience. That then allows us to ask: 'How good is the correspondence between reality and the stories (between E and SE) about reality given by the media (M)?' and 'How well is media content (SE) understood by the media audience (M2)?'

Related articles:

The Lasswell Formula

The Osgood and Schramm Model

The Lasswell Formula

The Shannon-Weaver Model

Berlo's S-M-C-R model

Maletzke's mass media model

Criticism of transmission models

Berlo on meaning

Ien Ang on Meaning

Stanley Fish on 'anti-formalism'