Berlo1

A Theory Study Of Berlo's SMCR Model
【Abstract】Berlo made the SMCR model by a development of the Shannon-Weaver communication system. It was considered the simplest and most influential message-centered model in the late of 20th century. Berlos‘ SMCR mo del broke up the communication process into four components: Source, Message, Channel and Receiver. The SMCR model points out that the final result of communication is not determined by a part of the spreading process, but by the combination of source, message, channel and receiver, as well as the relationship between them. The model maintained that a source encode a message for a channel to a receiver who decodes the message. Berlo believed that both Source (encoder) and Receiver (decoder) have to share the same set of elements (Communication skills, Attitudes, Knowledge, Social System and Culture)in order to achieve successful communication. The central element of the model is Message which included the content, elements, structure, treatment and code. Berlo pointed that channel can be thought of as a sense — smelling, tasting, feeling, hearing, seeing. However, sometimes messages failed to accomplish their purpose for many reasons. Berlo didn‘t take into account the noise existing through the communication. Besides, the model was a one-way and linear model of communication and was in defect of feedback loops. It implied that human communication is like machine communication, like signal-sending in telephone, television, computer, and radar systems.
【Key Words】Berlos‘ SMCR model; source; message; channel; receiver; communication
1.Background
The final communications model that we consider is the SMCR model, developed by David K. Ehninger, Gronbeck and Monroe: ―our time came from David Berlo who was a communications theorist and consultant. He stated his research in his book The Process of Communication published in 1960.
The model was actually significant after World War II. Besides，it was essentially an adaptation of the Shannon-Weaver model (Figure 1.0). Initially, the Shannon-Weaver model had many weaknesses, and the most serious shortcoming of the Shannon-Weaver communication system was that it is relatively static and linear. It conceived of a linear and literal transmission of information from one location to another. The notion of linearity leaded to misleading ideas when transferred to human conduct; some of the problems could best be underscored by studying several alternative models of communication.
Figure 1.0
As a result, Berlo made the SMCR model by a development of the Shannon-Weaver communication system. The SMCR model pointed out that the final result of communication is not determined by a part of the spreading process, but by the combination of source, message, channel and receiver, as well as the relationship between them. And Berlo emphasized that ―a given source may have a high level of skill not shared by one receiver, but shared by another. We can not predict the success of the source from her skill level al one.‖
2. Introduction
David Berlo's SMCR Model (1960) proposed that there were five elements within both the source/encoder and the receiver/decoder which will affect fidelity. The figure below shows the the four parts of Berlo‘s SMCR model are — no surprises here — source, message, channel, receiver. Berlo‘s model lived a number of factors under each of the elements.
Figure 2.0
From the figure above we can conclude that a source encode a message for a channel to a receiver who decodes the message. Berlo s‘ SMCR model (Figure 2.0) broke up the communication process into four components: Source, Message, Channel and Receiver.
2.1 Source and Receiver:
The first part of this communication model is the source. The idea of ―source‖ was flexibl e enough to include oral, written, electronic, or any other kind of ―symbolic‖ generator-of-messages.
All communication must come from some source. The source might be one person, a group of people, or a company, organization, or institution such as MU who is the sender of the message. So the source should be encoding the message by a kind of code. In general, we think of code in terms of the natural languages — English, Spanish, German, Chinese and others. Sometimes we use other languages — music, art, gestures.
Receiver is the final link and the targets in the communication process. The receiver is the person or persons who make up the audiences of your message who receives the message and decodes it. It is also referred as decoder.
The receiver may have more or less knowledge than the source. Social cultural context could be different in many ways from that of the source, but social background, education, friends, salary, culture would still be involved. Each will affect the receiver's understanding of the message.
The notions of ―encoding‖ and ―decoding‖ emphasized the problems we all have in translating our own thoughts into words or other symbols and in deciphering the words or symbols of others into terms we ourselves can understand.
This model believed that for an effective communication to take place the source and the receiver needs to be in the same level, only if the source and receiver are on the same level communication will happen or take place properly. Berlo firmly believed that the most important variables for successful communication lies in the relationship between the communicator, known as the Encoder or Source, and the listener, known as the Receiver or Decoder. He believed that common factors must exist between the encoder and decoder for successful communication to occur. So source and receiver should be similar.
For e.g. Communication skills on source side is good then the receiver should equally have good listening skills. When a teacher wants to teach some knowledge to his students, he must teach in a language which the students are familiar with. In addition, the knowledge should be understood by the students. Self understanding skills differs from person to person, for communicating the teacher should consider the students. Keep the receiver in mind, speak accordingly and give them what they need.
As outlined above, Berlo believed that both Source (encoder) and Receiver (decoder) have to share the same set of elements in order to achieve successful communication. He argues that the
way people communicate relate to their position within the socio‐cultural system whether they are educated or non‐educated, wealthy or poor. He claims that it is these factors that affect both Source and Receiver and in turn affect the communication process. Both Source and Receiver have to possess the following elements:
2.1.1 Communication skills: It is the individual‘s skill to communicate (ability to read, write, speak, listen etc…) Both Source and Receiver have to use the same language or code in order to communicate. They also have to share the same usage of signs, words and imagery. Berlo states that there are five verbal communication skills that fall under this category. The first four are taken from the Shannon‐Weaver model; two encoding skills being speaking and writing and two decoding skills – listening and reading. The fifth skill is the most crucial as it relates to thought and reasoning. Take for instance a highly skilled linguist who is fluent in numerous languages. As the linguist travels abroad, he succeeds in speaking and communicating with the natives of the country but fails to comprehend the codes of etiquette or gestures. In doing so, the receiver‘s opinion of the source alters whilst the source is unaware of this mishap; resulting in a changed relationship between the two.
Of course it is impossible for the Source to ensure all these elements are transpired in the message without the Receiver misinterpreting or following their own thought reasoning. There is no guarantee that the Receiver would be able to comprehend the language used to write the sentence if the sentence was written in a book that was published globally. The controlling factors of Communication Skills are therefore limited to direct communication between Source and Receiver.
2.1.2 Attitudes: The attitude towards the audience, subject and towards one self for e.g. for the student the attitude is to learn more and for teachers wants to help teach. Both parties have to share similar attitudes to the subject of conversation. If either party disagrees with the topic being conversed; a break‐down in communication occurs and a discussion becomes impossible. Conversely, if either Source or Receiver is uncertain of their ability to communicate then this could also have adverse affects on the message being transmitted. The Source would need to possess passion in the description of music on which they are conversing and they‘d need to keep a positive outlook of themselves so that they don‘t be come wary and question their own ability when describing music. Additionally the Source would also need to take into consideration the attitude of the Receiver. If the Source assumes the Receiver is of lower intelligence, then the attitude towards the Receiver would be affected and thus, the formation of codes could be of a simpler format than usual. This could result in the Receiver being offended by the Source and thus selectively absorbing certain aspects of the message or having a lower interest in the music subject.
2.1.3 Knowledge: The knowledge about the subject one is going to communicate for e.g. whatever the teacher communicates in the class about the subject so having knowledge in what you are communicating.
Both parties have to share the same skills and background knowledge from which to transmit. The knowledge aspect for the Source relates more to their behavior as opposed to their grasp of the
subject matter. The Source is required to address the ways in which they can communicate the message and to what effect would be best suited. Additionally, the Source would also have to be certain that the Receiver is competent enough to decipher their message in the given format from which they are transmitted.
2.1.4 Social System and Culture: The Social system includes the various aspects in society like values, beliefs, religion and general understanding of society. It is where the communication takes place. We can communicate only to the extent that the social system allows, when we communicate take social system into account. Culture of the particular society also comes under social system.
All to this model, only if you have the above in the proper or adequate proportion can communicate.
Both parties have to have experienced similar values, rules and beliefs within society and the cultural system which is also reflected in Habermas‘ quote that ‗ Every process of reaching understanding takes place against the background of a culturally ingrained pre‐understanding ‗(Habermas, 1984: p100). The impact of both Source and Receiver‘s social and cultural upbringing can affect the channels from which they choose to communicate, the words they choose in forming the message, the meanings they associate with specific words, the people they wish to communicate to and the purpose for their communication.
Common skills, attitudes, knowledge and social/cultural system skills between both communicators played a vital role in the exact transmission of the message. The wider the gap of skillsets between the Source and Receiver: the greater the chances of the message being misinterpreted.
2.2 Message:
The next component within the model is Message. It was made the central element, which was stressing the transmission of ideas. The Message is the information or content that is expressed by the Source and it consists of a series of elements that can be discussed individually but together they produce the overall effect of the message. This component takes into account the content, elements, structure, treatment and code of the message.
2.2.1 Content: The content is the information that relates to the subject of the message. In other words, the beginning to the end of a message comprises its content for e.g. From beginning to end whatever the class teacher speaks in the class is the content of the message.
2.2.2 Elements: The elements could be individual words, sounds, gestures, colors, images etc. that are incorporated to make up the message. Content is accompanied by some elements.
2.2.3 Structure: The structure of the message is how it is arranged, the way you structure the message into various parts. The structure relates to the formation at which the elements are
communicated. The same elements can produce different interpretations dependent upon the way in which they are formed.
2.2.4 Treatment: The treatment is the method in which the Source chooses to vary the formation of the elements and structure. It refers to the packing of the message. The way in which the message is conveyed or the way in which the message is passed on or deliver it. Through clever subtle variations, the same elements and structure can be combined to present an individual communication experience that can influence the final message. When there is too much treatment also the communication will not happen properly.
2.2.5 Code: The code of the message means how it is sent in what form it could be e.g. language, body language, gestures, music and even culture is a code. Through this you get/give the message or through which the communication takes place or being reached. Only when the code is proper, the message will be clear, improper use may lead to misinterpretation.
2.3 Channel:
Shannon and Weaver described this process as the encoding/decoding devices (Shannon & Weaver, 1949) as this was the means at which the message would be conveyed. Therefore, Berlo pointed that channel can be thought of as a sense — smelling, tasting, feeling, hearing, seeing. Sometimes it is preferable to think of the channel as the method over which the message will be transmitted: telegraph, newspaper, radio, letter, poster or other media. The Channel component takes into account the fives human senses – seeing, hearing, touching, smelling and tasting.
(i) Seeing: Visual channels for e.g. TV can be seen and the message is delivered.
(ii) Hearing: The use of ears to get the message for e.g. oral messages, interpersonal etc.
(iii) Touching: The sense of touch can be used as a channel to communicate for e.g. we touch and buy food, hugging etc.
(iv) Smelling: Smell also can be a channel to communicate for e.g. perfumes, food, charred smell communicates something is burning, we can find out about which food is being cooked etc.
(v) Tasting: The tongue also can be used to decipher e.g. Food can be tasted and communication can happen.
Note: Despite not mentioning a medium we need to assume that as communication is taking place channels can be any of the 5 senses or combination.
Kind and number of channels to use may depend largely on purpose. In general, the more you can use and the more you tailor your message to the people "receiving" each channel, the more effective your message.
What‘s more, i t is at this stage whereby the Channel could be affected by noise. In all communication, there is a sender, a message and a receiver. The meaning of a message is greatly dependent on the culture in which it is transmitted. The sender encodes a message, the receiver decodes it. Between the sender, the message and receiver, noise gets in the way and complicates
the process. Noise is an interruption element of the message. It occurs during transmission of the message from sender to receiver and can alter the received message from the one originally transmitted.
3. Thought of Berlo's SMCR Model
3.1 However, Berlo didn‘t take into account the noise existing through the communication. A noiseless communication does not exist. There always is some kind of noise entering the communication. Noise can be physical noise for example static or psychological i.e. when culture, taboos or values come into play to disrupt the normal transmission process of communication. Misunderstanding of a particular message i.e. distortion of meaning is a form of noise, example, the game of Chinese Whisper‘s person starts off with a particular message and the original message may be distorted by the time it comes to the final player.
Noise falls into two classifications: physical noise and semantic noise.
(i) Physical noise could be anything from the sound of the crowds on a busy street as a conversation takes place on a mobile phone to static randomly occurring on the TV set during an episode of Big Brother. Either way, physical noise is the noise made from the surrounding areas at which a message is being conveyed.
(ii) Semantic noise is completely different. Semantic noise occurs from either the source, the message or both. The code with which the source chooses to communicate could perhaps be too simple and monotonous that the rece iver‘s attention diverts away from the message. Alternatively, the message that the source is transmitting to the receiver could be of a shocking nature, horrifying the receiver and thus, preventing them from absorbing the remaining contents of the message that follows.
3.2 Berlo‘s model does not take into account the possibility for the receiver to respond, comment or ask further questions when in communication with the source which is called ―feedback‖. Feedback, a term form cybernetics, is the study of messages obtained from the receiver. It refers to an inquiry, response or experiment. Feedback can be positive (when the required result is achieved) or negative; instantaneous (when the response is immediate) or delayed. Feedback is used to gauge the effectiveness of a particular message put forth or situation that has taken place.
3.3 The model depicts a linear flow from left to right; that the source begins the communication and delivers all messages to the receiver. In reality, communication is usually a two‐way or multi‐way process. Feedback should be taken into account in every communication systems. When receiver gets the messages transmitted by source through a channel, receiver must have good or bad thought about the messages. Without feedback, s ource won‘t know whether how the receiver has received the messages and the improvement of the communication suggested by the receiver.
3.4 Although Berlo‘s SMCR Model is a entire communication model, sometimes messages fail to accomplish their purpose. There are many reasons for the failure, for a few examples: Frequently
the source is unaware of receivers and how they view things. Certain channels may not be as effective under certain circumstances. Treatment of a message may not fit a certain channel. Or some receivers simply may not be aware of, interested in, or capable of using certain available messages.
4. The strengths and weaknesses
Everything in the world would have two sides itself, the good and the bad. And the same with Berlo‘s SMCR Model, it also has the strengths and weeknesses.
4.1 The strengths:
(i) Several important factors must be considered relating to source, message, channel, receiver. (ii) Explain the element influencing the efficient and effect of communication.
(iii) It was widely applied to the general mode of transmission, especially in communication of education.
(iv) It was suitable to research and explain the elements and structure of instructional communication system.
(v) It demonstrated that the elements influencing efficiency and effectiveness of instructional information communication were complex, interrelated and mutual restraint.
4.2 The weaknesses:
(i) It was a one-way and linear model of communication
(ii) Be in defect of feedback loops. D on‘t know about th e effect
(iii) Did not take into account barriers/noises to communication
(iv) It needed people to be on same level for communication to occur but not true in real life
(v) Omit the usage of sixth sense as a channel which is actually a gift to the human beings (thinking, understanding, analyzing etc).
(vi) It tended to stress the manipulation of the message—the encoding and decoding processes (vii) It implied that human communication is like machine communication, like signal-sending in telephone, television, computer, and radar systems.
References:
(i) Harold D. Lasswell., "The Structure and Function of Communication in Society," The Communication of Ideas, editor, Lyman Bryson (New York: Institute for Religious and Social Studies, Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1948)
(ii) John W. Riley. Jr., and Matilda White Riley, "Mass Communication and the Social System." Sociology Today, V olume II, Robert K. Merton, Leonard Brown and Leonard D. Cottrell, Jr., editors. (New York: Harper and Row, 1965)
(iii) David K. Berlo, The Process of Communication, (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1960).
(iv) Laswell, H. (1948). The structure and function of communication in society. In L. Bryson (Ed.), The communication of ideas. New York: Harper.
(v) Shannon, C. & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. . Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.。