Objective and Interpretive Theories in Sports

Hello and happy hump-day to all, here is a quick video of one of the most amazing plays I have seen in sports to wake you up! 

Today I will be looking into an aspect of metatheory, exciting I know! Metatheory is the inception of the communication world, but instead of a dream within a dream it is a theory about a theory. This complex idea can be broken down into simpler terms as the assumptions we make about a theory. When we make these assumptions we tend to group them on a scale somewhere between objective and interpretive. It is important to understand the differences between both sides of this spectrum because it allows us to understand the roots of theories. For this blog entry I will be taking a closer look at the differences between objective and interpretive theories while using the film Moneyball to illustrate the differences.

Before I get to the exciting video clips it’s important I explain to you the differences between objective and interpretive theories. An objective theory is one that explains the past and present, and predicts the future (Griffin 26). We tend to look at objective theories as measurable, factual, scientific and quantifiable.  A good objective theory will not only be testable, but will provide evidence. There are six main scientific standards for a good objective theory but three I find key; explanation of data, prediction of future events, and a hypothesis that can be tested. These are all relatively self-explanatory standards, but if you require more depth or clarity I recommend reading pages 26-30 in Em Griffin’s “A First Look at Communication Theory”. I think when looking at objective theory it’s easiest to think of it as theories not influenced by personal feelings, biases, or opinions, it is simply based on fact.

Interpretive theories on the other hand assume multiple truths or meanings as possible. They are subjective, socially constructed and depend on context, and perception. A good interpretive theory also follows scientific standards. A well thought out interpretive theory will provide a new understanding of people, clarify values, have a community of agreement, as well as qualitative research. More depth on these standards can also be found in the aforementioned textbook on pages 31-34. We can see an example of interpretive theories such as the cultural approach, cultural studies, or the interactional view. As you can infer these theories are less scientific and based on interaction, culture, and perspective. Interpretive theories may involve in-depth interviews while an objective theory may focus more on surveys or data bases.

Now since I am attempting to tie sports into each blog post, I have taken two clips from the film Moneyball. For those who have not seen it I highly recommend it, between Brad Pitt’s good looks and the intriguing story about sports there is enough to keep members of both sexes interested throughout. In brief, the film is about the Oakland A’s, a small budget Major League Baseball team. Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) is responsible for putting together the team of players and faces some challenges. Although the clips I am sharing do not necessarily portray particular communication theories, I feel they provide a great picture of the difference between an objective approach and an interpretive one. 

The first clip is one where Billy Beane (Pitt) is discussing with his old scouts on how the team should be built. As we can see in this clip the old scouts take a more interpretive approach to the problem They use their perception of players, socially constructed opinions and subjective ideas on how the team should be built. We hear them talking about how the girlfriends look, their confidence, jaws, etc.  Their theories address values they have, are less scientific, and focus on the opinions of the scouts rather than science or facts.

In this second clip Billy Beane is listening to a young Peter Brand (played by Jonah Hill) about his theory on how the team should be built. As we can see here a more objective approach is being taken. Brand’s theory is measurable, factual, scientific and predicts the future. These examples provide us evidence as to how this dichotomy between objective and interpretive is everywhere, making it crucial to understand. This is not to say that one theory is better than another, it shows that depending on the situation different theories are applicable. 

We can see objective and interpretive theories all over. Whether it is used in sports to pick your team or it is used in differentiating communication theories. I hope you now have an improved understanding of objective and interpretive theories and are able to see how they can help you not only understand communication theories but theories in general. The more (communication) theories you understand the more aware you become of any personal biases or tendencies you might have which is beneficial in communication. So the next time you are reading about a communication theory, or one of your buddies has a crazy theory about the zombie apocalypse, try and place the theory on the scale and see if it meets the standards!

Please feel free to leave me any comments, ideas, etc. for my next blog(s). Until next time, stay cool friends!

-Zach

Citation

Griffin, Em. A First Look at Communication Theory. 8th. New York: McGraw Hill, 2012. Print.