A discussion of the theory that content analysis of messages is a central topic in all sciences dealing with man. Assigning properties to words and then counting the appearances of the properties is insufficient; the content of a message should be analyzed in terms of what has gone before and its relationship to what the sender and the receiver already know. The contribution of linguistics is to explicate the relationship between overt expression and content. The remarkably complicated relationships between acoustic signals and content are simplified by syntactic analysis, preferably through the use of computers. Much about language cannot be explained without grand theory, and the unexplained part is what is needed for content analysis. Linguistics can furnish a partial model of the communicator; models of cognitive processing and of attitude formation and change are also needed. Serious work on content analysis could alter the social and behavioral sciences in fundamental ways. 21 pp. Ref.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Paper series. The paper was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.