Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Knowledge gap hypothesis
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== Scholarly debates == The framework of the hypothesis was widely criticized throughout mass communications studies. In 1977, Ettema and Kline moved the lens of focus of the Knowledge gap hypothesis from deficits of knowledge acquisition to differences in acquiring knowledge. Central to their argument was the aspect of motivation that people of different SES would demonstrate to learn new information. Ettema and Kline concluded that the less education and knowledge held by people of lower SES was functional, thus enough for them.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Roloff |first=Michael |last2=Shoemaker |first2=Pamela |date=2003-04-01 |title=2001-2002 Reviewer Acknowledgment |url=https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650202250872 |journal=Communication Research |volume=30 |issue=2 |pages=111–112 |doi=10.1177/0093650202250872 |issn=0000-0000|url-access=subscription }}</ref> In 1980, Dervin started questioning the traditional source-receiver model of mass communication, as concentrating on receivers’ failure to get and interpret information is “blaming the victim.”<ref>{{Cite web |title=Communication gaps and inequities moving toward a reconceptualization {{!}} WorldCat.org |url=https://search.worldcat.org/en/title/733067141 |access-date=2025-03-04 |website=search.worldcat.org |language=en}}</ref> In 2003, Everett Rogers renamed the Knowledge gap hypothesis to the Communication Effects Gap hypothesis, as the existing gap was attributed to miscommunication and had nothing to do with receivers of information. Further debates surrounded the Knowledge Gap Hypothesis regarding the definition of the hypothesis in the textbook as it seemed unattractive to people of different SESs. The idea of posing open-ended questions was introduced to let responders answer the questions more profoundly. However, Gaziano states that gaps in knowledge were still found, and according to Hwang and Jeong (2009), they resulted in smaller gaps compared to other methods of analyzing the hypothesis.<ref name=":02">{{Cite web |last=Communication |first=in Cultural |last2=Communication |first2=Mass |last3=Psychology |last4=Behavioral |last5=Science |first5=Social |date=2013-02-02 |title=Knowledge Gap Theory |url=https://www.communicationtheory.org/knowledge-gap-theory/ |access-date=2025-03-02 |website=Communication Theory |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Hwang |first=Yoori |last2=Jeong |first2=Se-Hoon |date=2009-09-01 |title=Revisiting the Knowledge Gap Hypothesis: A Meta-Analysis of Thirty-Five Years of Research |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/107769900908600304 |journal=Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly |language=en |volume=86 |issue=3 |pages=513–532 |doi=10.1177/107769900908600304 |issn=1077-6990|url-access=subscription }}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)