Editing Intrapersonal communication (section)

== Research and criticism ==
Intrapersonal communication has not been researched as thoroughly as other types of communication. One reason is that there are additional problems concerning how to study it and how to conceptualize it.{{sfn|Lederman|2002|pp=[https://www.encyclopedia.com/media/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/intrapersonal-communication 490–492]|loc=Intrapersonal communication}}{{sfn|Cunningham|1992|p=597}}{{sfn|Barker|Wiseman|1966|p=172}} A difficulty in this regard is that it is not as easy to observe as interpersonal communication. This is due to the fact that it mostly occurs internally without an immediate external manifestation.{{sfn|Barker|Wiseman|1966|pp=172–173}}{{sfn|Cunningham|1992|p=597}} Since it is not directly observable, it has to be inferred based on other changes that can be visible. For example, when seeing that a person dresses well and takes care of their health, one may infer that certain intrapersonal relationships are responsible for this behavior. A similar inference about a person's inner life could be drawn based on whether they respond to a compliment by bragging or by playing it down.{{sfn|Lederman|2002|pp=[https://www.encyclopedia.com/media/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/intrapersonal-communication 490–492]|loc=Intrapersonal communication}}

A further approach is to use [[questionnaires]] to study intrapersonal communication. Questionnaires sometimes used in the process include the Self-Talk Scale, the Varieties of Inner Speech Questionnaire, and the Internal Dialogical Activity Scale. Among other things, they aim to measure what types of intrapersonal communication a person engages in and how frequently they do so.{{sfn|Oleś|Brinthaupt|Dier|Polak|2020|pp=2–3}} Younger children are less likely to report using inner speech instead of visual thinking than older children and adults. But it is not known whether this is due to lack of inner speech or due to insufficiently developed introspection.{{sfn|Charles Fernyhough|2016|loc=4. "Two Cars"}} A method to study intrapersonal communication in natural environments, developed by [[Russell Hurlburt]], is to have participants describe their inner experience at random intervals the moment a beeper goes off.{{sfn|Hurlburt|2011|pp=xi–xii}}

Some criticisms focus on the concept of intrapersonal communication itself. Intrapersonal communication is commonly accepted and used as a distinct type of communication.{{sfn|Catt|Eicher-Catt|2010|pp=35–36}}{{sfn|Cunningham|1992|p=597}} However, some theorists reject the claim that it is actually a form of communication. Instead, they see it as a different phenomenon that is merely related to communication. A prominent defender of this position is Cunningham. He argues that many inner experiences discussed under this label form part of communicative processes. But he denies that they themselves are instances of communication.{{sfn|Catt|Eicher-Catt|2010|pp=35–36}} This pertains to forms of cognitive, perceptual, and motivational episodes commonly categorized as intrapersonal communication.{{sfn|Cunningham|1992|p=598}} He sees such categorizations as an "uncritical extension of communication terminology and metaphors to the facts of our inner life space."{{sfn|Cunningham|1992|p=604}} This is closely connected to the problem that the expression "intrapersonal communication" is often used in a very wide and ambiguous sense.{{sfn|Cunningham|1992|p=616}} However, some theorists have objected to Cunningham's critique. One argument is that communication studies in general is a multiparadigmatic discipline. This implies that it has not yet established definitions of its terms that are both precise and generally accepted. According to this view, the lack of precision does not mean that the concept is useless.{{sfn|Barker|Barker|1992|pp=633, 635–636, 640–641}}{{sfn|Applegate|1992|pp=621–632}}
	
A further problem in defining intrapersonal communication is that there are countless processes within the human body responsible for exchanging messages. So when understood in this very wide sense, even processes like breathing could be understood as intrapersonal communication. For this reason, the term is usually understood in a more restricted sense.{{sfn|Catt|Eicher-Catt|2010|pp=35–36}} Frank J. Macke approaches this problem by arguing that intrapersonal communication has to do with meaning and that some form of communicative experience is involved. On this view, the mechanical exchange of messages alone is not sufficient for communication.{{sfn|Catt|Eicher-Catt|2010|pp=34, 43–44}}