Publication | Closed Access
Interactivity: a concept explication
582
Citations
34
References
2002
Year
Emerging MediaInteraction ModelConcept ExplicationCommunicationJournalismInteractive CommunicationInteraction ParadigmDetailed ExplicationSocial MediaCommunication ManagementCyberpsychologyConversation AnalysisMedia PsychologyComputer-mediated CommunicationCognitive ScienceCommunication EffectsCommunication StudyInteraction TechniqueUser ExperienceSocial InteractionPopular CommunicationMediated CommunicationInterpersonal CommunicationHuman CommunicationHuman InteractionHuman-computer InteractionRelational CommunicationMass CommunicationArts
The rise of the web has spurred widespread use of interactivity as a variable, yet its definitions remain scattered and incoherent. This study aims to produce a detailed explication of interactivity to foster consensus on its theoretical and operational definitions. Employing Chaffee’s (1991) concept‑explication framework, the authors generate new theoretical and operational definitions for future research. Interactivity is identified as both a media and psychological factor that varies across communication technologies, contexts, and users’ perceptions.
The use of interactivity as a variable in empirical investigations has dramatically increased with the emergence of new communication channels such as the world wide web. Though many scholars have employed the concept in analyses, theoretical and operational definitions are exceedingly scattered and incoherent. Accordingly, the purpose of this project is to engender a detailed explication of interactivity that could bring some consensus to how the concept should be theoretically and operationally defined. Following Chaffee’s (1991) framework for concept explication, we generate new theoretical and operational definitions that may be central to future work in this area. In particular, we suggest that interactivity is both a media and psychological factor that varies across communication technologies, communication contexts, and people’s perceptions.
| Year | Citations | |
|---|---|---|
Page 1
Page 1