The Transmission Model of Communication (2023)

The Transmission Model of Communication

Communication is driven by the achievement of some goal. This is called “Communication Intention.”

There are two basic communication “intentions:”

  • Relationship/Ritual Intentions – The intention is to build relationships. The and/or “Transaction.”

The “Transmission Model of Communication” describes how those “intentions” are achieved.

It also provides the mathematical foundation for the “Fractal Model of Communication.”

This lesson attempts to help us better understand the very well-known model of communication developed by Claude Shannon, The Transmission Model of Communication.

It is presented here as the “prototypical” example of a model which reduces communication to a process of ‘transmitting information’.

The Transmission Model of Communication (1)

The underlying metaphor of communication as “transmission” makes sense from a pragmatic perspective and drives this ‘commonsense’ everyday usage of communication as transmission.

And the addition of “Noise” to communication was brilliant and groundbreaking. However, it failed to account for the influence of “iteration” on the process.

Shannon’s model is pretty widely accepted as one of the main seeds out of which our 21st Century Hyper-connected Digital World has evolved.

Claude Shannon was not a social scientist. He was an engineer working for Bell Telephone Labs in the United States.

His goal was to ensure the maximum efficiency of telephone cables and radio waves.

Shannon’s work proved valuable for communication engineers in dealing with such issues as the capacity of various communication channels in ‘bits per second’.

It contributed to computer science. It led to very useful work on redundancy in language. And by making ‘information’ ‘measurable,’ gave birth to the mathematical study of ‘information theory’.

The Transmission Model of Communication

Two alternative conceptions of communication have been alive in American culture since this term entered common discourse in the nineteenth century.

(Video) Transmission Model of Communication

Both definitions derive, as with much in secular culture, from religious origins, though they refer to somewhat different regions of religious experience.

We might label these descriptions, a transmission view of communication and a ritual view of communication.

The transmission view of communication is the commonest in our culture–perhaps in all industrial cultures–and dominates contemporary dictionary entries under the term.

It is defined by terms such as “imparting,” “sending,” “transmitting,” or “giving information to others.”

It is formed from a metaphor of geography or transportation. In the nineteenth century but to a lesser extent today, the movement of goods or people and the movement of information were seen as essentially identical processes and both were described by the common noun “communication.”

The center of this idea of communication is the transmission of signals or messages over distance for the purpose of control.

It is a view of communication that derives from one of the most ancient of human dreams: the desire to increase the speed and effect of messages as they travel in space…

The roots of the transmission view of communication, in our culture at least, lie in essentially religious attitudes….Communication was viewed as a process and technology that would sometimes for religious purposes, spread, transmit, and disseminate knowledge, ideas, and information farther and faster with the goal of controlling space and people.

The Ritual Model of Communication

(See the Lesson on the Ritual Model of Communication for more learning)

A ritual model of communication is directed not toward the extension of messages in space but toward the maintenance of society in time; not the act of imparting information but the representation of shared beliefs.

If the archetypal case of communication under a transmission view is the extension of messages across geography for the purpose of control, the archetypal case under a ritual view is the sacred ceremony that draws persons together in fellowship and commonality.

The indebtedness of the ritual view of communication to religion is apparent in the name chosen to label it.

Moreover, it derives from a view of religion that downplays the role of the sermon, the instruction, and admonition, in order to highlight the role of the prater, the chant, and the ceremony.

It sees the original or highest manifestation of communication not in the transmission of intelligent information but in the construction and maintenance of an ordered, meaningful cultural world that can serve as a control and container for human action.

Different Views of Transmission and Ritual Views of Communication

If one examines a newspaper under a transmission view of communication, one sees the medium as an instrument for disseminating news and knowledge, in larger and larger packages over greater distances.

A ritual view of communication will focus on a different range of problems in examining a newspaper. It will, for example, view reading a newspaper less as sending or gaining information and more as attending a mass, a situation in which nothing new is learned but in which a particular view of the world is portrayed and confirmed.

A ritual view sees news reading, and writing as a ritual act and moreover a dramatic one. What is arrayed before the reader is not pure information but a portrayal of the contending forces in the world. Moreover, as readers make their way through the paper, they engage in a continual shift of roles or of dramatic focus.

Under a ritual view, then, the news is not information but drama. It does not describe the world but portrays an arena of dramatic focus and action; it exists solely in historical time; and it invites our participation on the basis of our assuming, often vicariously, social roles within it.

Both Can and Do Co-exist

Neither of these counterposed views of communication necessarily denies what the other affirms.

(Video) Transmission Model of Communication: Shannon and Weaver

A ritual view does not exclude the processes of information transmission or attitude change. It merely contends that one cannot understand these processes right except insofar as they are cast within an essentially ritualistic view of communication and social order.

To study communication is to examine the actual social process wherein significant symbolic forms are created, apprehended, and used….Our attempts to construct, maintain, repair, and transform reality are publicly observable activities that occur in historical time.

We create, express, and convey our knowledge of and attitudes toward reality through the construction of a variety of symbol systems: art, science, journalism, religion, common sense, and mythology.

Here are some questions to help us determine the Best Communication for the Situation:

  • How do we do this?
  • What are the differences between these forms?
  • What are the historical and comparative variations in them?
  • How do changes in communication technology influence what we can concretely create and apprehend?
  • How do groups in society struggle over the definition of what is real?

Six Components of the Transmission Model of Communication:

  • Source – produces a message to achieve an intent.
  • Transmitter – encodes the message into signals
  • Channel – medium for the transmission
  • Receiver – ‘decodes’ (reconstructs) the message from the signal.
  • Destination – acts on the message’s intent
  • Noise – a dysfunctional factor: any interference with the message traveling along the channel (such as ‘static’ on the telephone or radio) which may lead to the signal received is different from that sent.

For the telephone the channel is a wire, the signal is an electrical current in it, and the transmitter and receiver are the telephone handsets. Noise would include crackling from the wire. In conversation, my mouth is the transmitter, the signal is the sound waves, and your ear is the receiver. Noise would include any distraction you might experience as I speak.

Although in Shannon’s model a speaker and a listener would strictly be the source and the destination rather than the transmitter and the receiver, in discussions of the model the participants are commonly humanized as the sender and the receiver.

My critical comments will refer less specifically to Shannon and Weaver’s model than to the general transmission model which it reflects, where communication consists of a Sender passing a Message to a Receiver. So when I am discussing transmission models in general I too will refer to the participants as the Sender and the Receiver.

Shannon and Weaver’s transmission model is the best-known example of the ‘informational’ approach to communication. Although no serious communication theorist would still accept it, it has also been the most influential model of communication which has yet been developed, and it reflects a commonsense (if misleading) understanding of what communication is. Lasswell’s verbal version of this model: ‘Who says what in which channel to whom with what effect ?’ was reflected in subsequent research in human communication which was closely allied to behaviouristic approaches.

Levels of problems in the analysis of communication

Shannon and Weaver argued that there were three levels of problems in communication:

  • A – The technical problem: how accurately can the message be transmitted?
  • B – The semantic problem: how precisely is the meaning ‘conveyed’?
  • C – The effectiveness problem: how effectively does the received meaning affect behavior?

Shannon and Weaver somewhat naively assumed that sorting out Level A problems would lead to improvements at the other levels.

Although the concept of ‘noise’ does make some allowance for the way in which messages may be ‘distorted’, this frames the issue in terms of incidental ‘interference’ with the sender’s intentions rather than in terms of a central and purposive process of interpretation. The concept reflects Shannon and Weaver’s concern with accuracy and efficiency.

Advantages of Shannon and Weaver’s model

Particular models are useful for some purposes and less useful for others.

Like any process of mediation, a model foregrounds some features and backgrounds others. The strengths of Shannon and Weaver’s model are its
simplicity, generality, and quantifiability.

Such advantages made this model attractive to several academic disciplines. It also drew serious academic attention to human communication and ‘information theory’, leading to further theory and research.

Weaknesses of the transmission model of communication

The transmission model is not merely a gross over-simplification but a dangerously misleading misrepresentation of the nature of human communication.

This is particularly important since it underlies the ‘commonsense’ understanding of what communication is. Whilst such usage may be adequate for many everyday purposes, in the context of the study of media and communication the concept needs critical reframing.


Shannon and Weaver’s highly mechanistic model of communication can be seen as being based on a transport metaphor. James Carey (1989: 15) notes that in the nineteenth century the movement of information was seen as basically the same as the transport of goods or people, both being described as ‘communication’. Carey argues that ‘it is a view of communication that derives from one of the most ancient of human dreams: the desire to increase the speed and effect of messages as they travel in space’ (ibid.) Writing always had to be transported to the reader, so in written communication the transport of letters, books and newspapers supported the notion of the transport of meaning from writer to readers. As Carey notes, ‘The telegraph ended the identity but did not destroy the metaphor’ (ibid.).

Within the broad scope of transport I tend to see the model primarily as employing a postal metaphor. It is as if communication consists of a sender sending a packet of information to a receiver, whereas I would insist that communication is about meaning rather than information. One appalling consequence of the postal metaphor for communication is the current reference to ‘delivering the curriculum’ in schools, as a consequence of which teachers are treated as postal workers. But the influence of the transmission model is widespread in our daily speech when we talk of ‘conveying meaning’, ‘getting the idea across’, ‘transferring information’, and so on. We have to be very alert indeed to avoid falling into the clutches of such transmissive metaphors.

(Video) Transmission Model of Communication

Michael Reddy (1979) has noted our extensive use in English of ‘the conduit metaphor’ in describing communicative acts. In this metaphor, ‘The speaker puts ideas (objects) into words (containers) and sends them (along a conduit) to a hearer who takes the idea/objects out of the word/containers’ (Lakoff & Johnson 1980: 10). The assumptions the metaphor involves are that:

Language functions like a conduit, transferring thoughts bodily from one person to another;
in writing and speaking, people insert their thoughts or feelings into the words;
words accomplish the transfer by containing the thoughts or feelings and conveying them to others;
in listening or reading, people extract the thoughts and feelings once again from the words. (Reddy 1979: 290)
As Reddy notes, if this view of language were correct, learning would be effortless and accurate. The problem with this view of language is that learning is seen as passive, with the learner simply ‘taking in’ information (Bowers 1988: 42). I prefer to suggest that there is no information in language, in books or in any medium per se. If language and books do ‘contain’ something, this is only words rather than information. Information and meaning arises only in the process of listeners, readers or viewers actively making sense of what they hear or see. Meaning is not ‘extracted’, but constructed.

In relation to mass communication rather than interpersonal communication, key metaphors associated with a transmission model are those of the hypodermic needle and of the bullet. In the context of mass communication such metaphors are now largely used only as the targets of criticism by researchers in the field.


The transmission model fixes and separates the roles of ‘sender’ and ‘receiver’. But communication between two people involves simultaneous ‘sending’ and ‘receiving’ (not only talking, but also ‘body language’ and so on). In Shannon and Weaver’s model the source is seen as the active decision-maker who determines the meaning of the message; the destination is the passive target.

It is a linear, one-way model, ascribing a secondary role to the ‘receiver’, who is seen as absorbing information. However, communication is not a one-way street. Even when we are simply listening to the radio, reading a book or watching TV we are far more interpretively active than we normally realize.

There was no provision in the original model for feedback (reaction from the receiver). Feedback enables speakers to adjust their performance to the needs and responses of their audience. A ‘feedback loop’ was added by later theorists, but the model remains linear.

Content and meaning

In this model, even the nature of the content seems irrelevant, whereas the subject, or the way in which the participants feel about it, can shape the process of communication. Insofar as content has any place (typically framed as ‘the message’), transmission models tend to equate content and meaning, whereas there may be varying degrees of divergence between the ‘intended meaning’ and the meanings generated by interpreters.

According to Erik Meeuwissen (e-mail 26/2/98) Shannon himself was well aware of the fact that his theory did not address meaning. He offers these supportive quotations from Shannon and Weaver:

The fundamental problem of communication is that of reproducing at one point either exactly or approximately a message selected at another point. Frequently the messages have meaning; that is they refer to or are correlated according to some system with certain physical or conceptual entities. These semantic aspects of communication are irrelevant to the engineering problem (Shannon 1948).
The word information, in this theory, is used in a special sense that must not be confused with its ordinary usage. In particular, information must not be confused with meaning. In fact, two messages, one of which is heavily loaded with meaning and the other of which is pure nonsense, can be exactly equivalent, from the present viewpoint, as regards information. It is this, undoubtedly, that Shannon means when he says that ‘the semantic aspects of communication are irrelevant to the engineering aspects. (Weaver 1949)

Weaver also noted that the theory
…has so penetratingly cleared the air that one is now, perhaps for the first time, ready for a real theory of meaning. An engineering communication theory is just like a very proper and discreet girl accepting your telegram. She pays no attention to the meaning whether it be sad, or joyous, or embarrassing. But she must be prepared to deal with all that come to her desk (Weaver 1949).
However, the important point here is that meaning-making is not central in transmission models. It is widely assumed that meaning is contained in the ‘message’ rather than in its interpretation. But there is no single, fixed meaning in any message. We bring varying attitudes, expectations and understandings to communicative situations. Even if the receiver sees or hears exactly the same message which the sender sent, the sense which the receiver makes of it may be quite different from the sender’s intention. The same ‘message’ may represent multiple meanings. The word ‘message’ is a sort of microcosm of the whole postal metaphor, so I’m not happy with even using that label.

Transmission models treat decoding as a mirror image of encoding, allowing no room for the receiver’s interpretative frames of reference. Where the message is recorded in some form ‘senders’ may well have little idea of who the ‘receivers’ may be (particularly, of course, in relation to mass communication). The receiver need not simply accept, but may alternatively ignore or oppose a message. We don’t all necessarily have to accept messages which suggest that a particular political programme is good for us.


The transmission model is an instrumental model in that it treats communication as a means to a predetermined end. Perhaps this is the way in which some people experience communication. However, not all communication is intentional: people unintentionally communicate a great deal about their attitudes simply through body language. And, although this idea will sound daft to those who’ve never experienced it, when some of us write something, we sometimes find out what we want to say only after we’ve finished writing about it.

Some critics argue that this model is geared towards improving a communicator’s ability to manipulate a receiver. Carey notes that ‘the centre of this idea of communication is the transmission of signals or messages over distance for the purposes of control… of distance and people’ (Carey 1989: 15).

In an instrumental framework the process involved is intended to be ‘transparent’ to the participants (nothing is intended to distract from the sender’s communicative goal). Such a conception is as fundamental to the rhetoric of science as it is alien to that of art. ‘Perfectly transparent communication’ is impossible.


Nor is there any mention in the transmission model of the importance of context: situational, social, institutional, political, cultural, historical. Meaning cannot be independent of such contexts. Whilst recorded texts (such as letters in relation to interpersonal communication and newspapers, films, radio and television programmes in relation to mass communication) allow texts to be physically separated from their contexts of production, this is not to say that meaning can be ‘context-free’. Whilst it is true that meaning is not wholly ‘determined’ by contexts of ‘production’ or ‘reception’ (texts do not mean simply what either their producers or their interpreters choose for them to mean), meanings may nevertheless be radically inflected by particular contexts of ‘writing’ and ‘reading’ in space and time. The ‘same’ text can be interpreted quite differently within different contexts.

(Video) Communication Models

Social contexts have a key influence on what are perceived as appropriate forms, styles and contents. Regarding situational context, it makes a lot of difference if the sender is an opinionated taxi-driver who drives aggressively, and the receiver is a passenger in the back seat whose primary concern is to arrive at the destination in one piece.

Relationships and purposes

In the transmission model the participants are treated as isolated individuals. Contemporary communication theorists treat communication as a shared social system. We are all social beings, and our communicative acts cannot be said to represent the expression of purely individual thoughts and feelings. Such thoughts and feelings are socio-culturally patterned. Even what we call ‘our’ language isn’t our own: we are born into it; we can’t change the rules. Words have connotations which we don’t choose for them. An emphasis on creative individuality is itself a culturally-shaped myth which had a historically ‘modern’ origin in Western Europe.

Transmission models of communication reduce human communication to the transmission of messages, whereas, as the linguists tell us, there is more to communication than this. They refer, for instance, to phatic communication, which is a way of maintaining relationships. In Britain, talking about the weather is far more a matter of phatic communication than of ‘transmitting information’.

No allowance is made in the transmission model for differing purposes. The same TV images of a football match would have very different meanings for the fans of opposing sides.

In models such as Shannon and Weaver’s no allowance is made for relationships between people as communicators (e.g. differences in power). We frame what is said differently according to the roles in which we communicate. If a friend asks you later what you thought of this lecture you are likely to answer in a somewhat different way from the way you might answer the same question from the undergraduate course director in his office. The interview is a very good example of the unequal power relationship in a communicative situation.

People in society do not all have the same social roles or the same rights. And not all meanings are accorded equal value. It makes a difference whether the participants are of the same social class, gender, broad age group or profession. We need only think of whose meanings prevail in the doctor’s surgery. And, more broadly, we all know that certain voices ‘carry more authority’ than others, and that in some contexts, ‘children are to be seen and not heard’. The dominant directionality involved in communication cannot be fixed in a model but must be related to the situational distribution of power.


Furthermore, Shannon and Weaver’s model makes no allowance for dynamic change over time. People don’t remain frozen in the same roles and relationships, with the same purposes. Even within the course of a single conversation, such relationships may continuously shift. Also, adopting a more ‘historical’ perspective, however stable the text may seem to be, the ways in which a recorded text may be interpreted depends also on circumstances at that time of its interpretation.


Finally, the model is indifferent to the nature of the medium. And yet whether you speak directly to, write to, or phone a lover, for instance, can have major implications for the meaning of your communication. There are widespread social conventions about the use of one medium rather than another for specific purposes. People also differ in their personal attitudes to the use of particular media (e.g. word processed Christmas circulars from friends!).

Furthermore, each medium has technological features which make it easier to use for some purposes than for others. Some media lend themselves to direct feedback more than others. The medium can affect both the form and the content of a message. The medium is therefore not simply ‘neutral ‘ in the process of communication.


In short, the transmissive model is of little direct value to social science research into human communication, and its endurance in popular discussion is a real liability. Its reductive influence has implications not only for the commonsense understanding of communication in general, but also for specific forms of communication such as speaking and listening, writing and reading, watching television and so on. In education, it represents a similarly transmissive model of teaching and learning. And in perception in general, it reflects the naive ‘realist’ notion that meanings exist in the world awaiting only decoding by the passive spectator. In all these contexts, such a model underestimates the creativity of the act of interpretation.

Alternatives to transmissive models of communication are normally described as constructivist: such perspectives acknowledge that meanings are actively constructed by both initiators and interpreters rather than simply ‘transmitted’. However, you will find no single, widely-accepted constructivist model of communication in a form like that of Shannon and Weaver’s block diagram. This is partly because those who approach communication from the constructivist perspective often reject the very idea of attempting to produce a formal model of communication. Where such models are offered, they stress the centrality of the act of making meaning and the importance of the socio-cultural context.


Bowers, C. A. (1988): The Cultural Dimensions of Educational Computing: Understanding the Non-Neutrality of Technology. New York: Teachers College Press [generally very useful, though difficult, and cited here only for commentary on Michael Reddy on pages 42-4]
Carey, James (1989): Communication as Culture. New York: Routledge (Chapter 1, ‘A Cultural Approach to Communication’)
Ellis, Russell & Ann McClintock (1990): If You Take My Meaning: Theory into Practice in Human Communication. London: Arnold (Chapter 5, (Communication Models’)
Fiske, John (1982): Introduction to Communication Studies. London: Routledge (Chapter 1, ‘Communication Theory’ is a good introduction to this topic)
Kress, Gunther (1988): ‘Communication and Culture’. In Gunther Kress (Ed.): Communication and Culture. Kensington, NSW: New South Wales University Press
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson (1980): Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
McQuail, Denis & Sven Windahl (1993): Communication Models for the Study of Mass Communication. London: Longman
Reddy, Michael J. (1979): ‘The Conduit Metaphor: A Case of Frame Conflict in our Language about Language’. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.): Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press [for commentaries see: Bowers 1988: 38ff; Lakoff & Johnson 1980: 10-12]
Shannon, Claude E (1948): ‘A Mathematical Theory of Communication’, Part I, Bell Systems Technical Journal, 27, pp. 379-423
Shannon, Claude E. & Warren Weaver (1949): A Mathematical Model of Communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press
Smith, Frank (1983): Essays into Literacy. Portsmouth: Heinemann (Chapter 13, ‘A Metaphor for Literacy – Creating Worlds or Shunting Information?’)
Thwaites, Tony, Lloyd Davis & Warwick Mules (1994): Tools for Cultural Studies: An Introduction. South Melbourne: Macmillan (Chapter 1)
Weaver, Warren (1949): ‘Recent Contributions to the Mathematical Theory of Communication’. In Shannon & Weaver op.cit
See also any general reference books on communication.

Learning Management Systems Standards


Who created the transmission model of communication? ›

Barnlund. In light of these weaknesses, Barnlund (1970) proposed a transactional model of communication. The basic premise of the transactional model of communication is that individuals are simultaneously engaging in the sending and receiving of messages.

What are the elements of transmission model? ›

It is a transmission model consisting of five elements: an information source, which produces a message; a transmitter, which encodes the message into signals; a channel, to which signals are adapted for transmission; a receiver, which decodes (reconstructs) the message from the signal; a destination, where the message ...

What are the 4 types of communication models? ›

4 Types of Communication: Verbal, Non-verbal, Written, Visual.

What are the 3 models of communication models? ›

The three models of communication we will discuss are the transmission, interaction, and transaction models. Although these models of communication differ, they contain some common elements.

What are the advantages of transmission model of communication? ›

Pros: This model spotlights the sender and the possible noise that can affect the transmission of communication. Cons: This model is limited because it privileges how the sender communicates, with little attention paid to how the message is received.

What is the first and transmission model of communication? ›

The first theoretical model of communication was proposed in 1949 by Shannon and Weaver for Bell Laboratories. This three-part model was intended to capture the radio and television transmission process. However it was later adapted to human communication and is now known as the Linear Model of Communication.

What are the 5 means of transmission? ›

The transmission of microorganisms can be divided into the following five main routes: direct contact, fomites, aerosol (airborne), oral (ingestion), and vectorborne. Some microorganisms can be transmitted by more than one route.

What is transmission concept? ›

According to cultural transmission theory, the more one is integrated into such a deviant subculture, the more likely one is to live by its standards, even when those standards are antisocial vis-à-vis other groups.

What are the 4 ways of transmission? ›

The mode of transmission can include direct contact, droplets, a vector such as a mosquito, a vehicle such as food, or the airborne route.

What are the 7 types of communication? ›

Importance of Communication
  • Variety in Communication: Choose Wisely. We are lucky as humans to have a whole host of communication types available for us at our fingertips. ...
  • Interpersonal Communication. ...
  • Verbal Communication. ...
  • Nonverbal Communication. ...
  • Written Communication. ...
  • Visual Communication. ...
  • Listening.

What is the example of transactional model? ›

Examples of the transactional model include a face-to-face meeting, a telephone call, a Skype call, a chat session, interactive training, or a meeting in which all attendees participate by sharing ideas and comments. As with the linear model, noise can affect the communication.

What are the 3 main style of communication? ›

When communication occurs, it typically happens in one of three ways: verbal, nonverbal and visual. People very often take communication for granted.

Which of the 3 models of communication is the most effective? ›

Transactional communication can be verbal or non-verbal, such as body language conveying a certain message. Transactional communication is the most efficient model of communication, as there's no delay between messages.

What is the main objective of transmission? ›

The primary objective of transmission planning is to ensure the reliable supply to the demand as economically as possible.

Why transmission media is important? ›

The main functionality of the transmission media is to carry the information in the form of bits through LAN(Local Area Network). It is a physical path between transmitter and receiver in data communication. In a copper-based network, the bits in the form of electrical signals.

What is the transmission model of learning? ›

The transmission instructional model is a teacher-centered teaching and learning model in which the teacher's role is to design lessons aimed at predetermined goals and to present knowledge and skills in a predetermined order, and students' tasks are to passively acquire teacher-specified knowledge and skills (Guzzetti ...

Who created the transmission model of communication in 1957? ›

In 1957 Westley and MacLean's model of communication is proposed by Bruce Westley (1915-1990) and Malcolm S. MacLean Jr (1913-2001). Being one of the creators of journalism studies, Westley served as a teacher at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, between 1946 and 1968.

What does the transactional model state? ›

The transactional model describes the way in which you can use transactions in message flows to accomplish certain tasks and results. A message flow consists of the following constituent parts: An input source. The message flow or logic, which is defined by a sequence of nodes.

What is the best model of communication? ›

The best known communication models are the transmitter-receiver model according to Shannon & Weaver, the 4-ear model according to Schulz von Thun and the iceberg model according to Watzlawick.

What are the 6 modes of transmission? ›

The modes (means) of transmission are: Contact (direct and/or indirect), Droplet, Airborne, Vector and Common Vehicle. The portal of entry is the means by which the infectious microorganisms gains access into the new host.

What is transmission and example? ›

Transmission is the act of sending something like a cold or a message, or the part of a machine that transmits power from the engine to the moving parts. An example of transmission is when something travels over cable wires to get to its destination.

What are different types of transmission explain? ›

Manual and automatic are the two types of transmission but there are different kinds of automatic transmissions like Automatic Transmission, Continuously Variable Transmission, Semi-automatic transmission and Dual Clutch Transmission.

What are the two main types of transmission? ›

There are two types of contact transmission: direct and indirect. Direct contact transmission occurs when there is physical contact between an infected person and a susceptible person. Indirect contact transmission occurs when there is no direct human-to-human contact.

What are the two mode of transmission? ›

Pathogens may be transferred from the source to a host by direct or indirect contact transmission and by respiratory transmission.

What are the 8 parts of the transactional communication model? ›

The communication process involves understanding, sharing, and meaning, and it consists of eight essential elements: source, message, channel, receiver, feedback, environment, context, and interference.

What are the 8 types of communication? ›

We identify 8 common types as:
  • Leadership and top-down comms (vertical communications)
  • Change communication.
  • Crisis communication.
  • Information comms.
  • Bottom-up or two-way communication.
  • Peer communication (horizontal communications)
  • Culture comms.
  • Campaign comms.
12 Jul 2019

What is the 8 step communication model? ›

3 The 8-Step Communication Planning Model 4 Using This Workbook 4 Step 1: Assess Your Current Situation 6 Step 2: Set Communication Goals and Objectives 8 Step 3: Identify Intended Audiences 10 Step 4: Develop and Pretest Messages 13 Step 5: Select Channels, Activities, and Materials 15 Step 6: Develop Action Plan 18 ...

What are the four 4 types of communication according to context? ›

Communication contexts include intrapersonal, interpersonal, group, public, and mass communication.

What is 7 C's of communication? ›

The seven C's of communication is a list of principles for written and spoken communications to ensure that they are effective. The seven C's are: clear, correct, complete, concrete, concise, considered and courteous.

What are the 4 importance of communication? ›

This article throws light on the thirteen major importance's of communication in management, i.e, (1) Basis of Decision-Making and Planning, (2) Smooth and Efficient Working of an Organisation, (3) Facilitates Co-Ordination, (4) Increases Managerial Efficiency, (5) Promotes Co-operation and Industrial Peace, (6) Helps ...

› blog › types-of-communicati... ›

Trying to brush up on your basic communication knowledge? We've got you covered — read all about the five types of communication: verbal, nonverbal, written...

Types of Communication › types-of-commu... › types-of-commu...
Communication Communication means transferring thoughts, information, emotion and ideas through gesture, voice, symbols, signs and expressions from one person t...
Communication skills are vital to a healthy, efficient workplace. Often categorized as a soft skill or an interpersonal skill, communication is the act of shari...

Who created the transmission model of communication in 1957? ›

In 1957 Westley and MacLean's model of communication is proposed by Bruce Westley (1915-1990) and Malcolm S. MacLean Jr (1913-2001). Being one of the creators of journalism studies, Westley served as a teacher at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, between 1946 and 1968.

Who invented data transmission? ›

1977: The Hayes 80-130A. The first personal computer modem, the Hayes 80-130A, was designed by Dennis Hayes and Dale Heatherington. The device allowed computer users to connect directly to their phone lines to create a personal network, something never experienced before.

What is Plato's model of communication? ›

Plato preferred to write in a dialogical form. In fact, he believed that oral communication is superior to written text (1). He believed that writing in the form of dialogues was useful for transmitting principles to people, with the aim of spreading the concepts of his doctrine in the most congenial way.

Who invented the communication model 7 38 55? ›

The rule states that 7 percent of meaning is communicated through spoken word, 38 percent through tone of voice, and 55 percent through body language. It was developed by psychology professor Albert Mehrabian at the University of California, Los Angeles, who laid out the concept in his 1971 book Silent Messages (1971).

What is the difference between Shannon Weaver and transaction model? ›

1 Answers. Shannon and Weaver model of communication has a few basic concepts to it: Sender, Encoder, Channel, Decoder, Receiver and Noise. Transaction model is called the circular model of communication since the sender becomes the receiver just as fast as the receiver becomes the sender.

What does the transactional model state? ›

The transactional model describes the way in which you can use transactions in message flows to accomplish certain tasks and results. A message flow consists of the following constituent parts: An input source. The message flow or logic, which is defined by a sequence of nodes.

Who proposed transactional model? ›

In 1970, Dean C. Barnlund created the transactional model of communication to understand basic interpersonal communication. Barnlund argues that one of the problems with the more linear models of communication is that they resemble mediated messages.

What data transmission means? ›

What is Data Transmission? Data transmission is the transfer of data from one digital device to another. This transfer occurs via point-to-point data streams or channels. These channels may previously have been in the form of copper wires but are now much more likely to be part of a wireless network.

What is data transmission called? ›

Data transmission, digital transmission or digital communications is the transfer of data over a point-to-point or point-to-multipoint communication channel. Examples of such channels include copper wires, optical fibers, wireless communication channels, storage media and computer buses.

What are the types of data transmission? ›

There are two methods used to transmit data between digital devices: serial transmission and parallel transmission. Serial data transmission sends data bits one after another over a single channel. Parallel data transmission sends multiple data bits at the same time over multiple channels.

What is Aristotle's model of communication? ›

The Aristotle model of communication is the widely accepted and the most common model of communication where the sender sends the information or a message to the receivers to influence them and make them respond and act accordingly.

What model of communication is Aristotle's model? ›

Aristotle's model of communication is a speaker-oriented model. He believed that the speaker is the most important element in communication. Aristotle's Model is largely focused on speaker and speech. It is the speaker's job to give a speech to the community.

What is Aristotle model of communication example? ›

An example

A politician (the speaker) gives a speech on a market square during an election campaign (the occasion). His goal is the win the votes of the citizens (the audience) present as well as those of the citizens potentially watching the speech on TV.

What is the 7 %- 38 %- 55 model of communication? ›

The 7-38-55 rule indicates that only 7% of all communication is done through verbal communication, whereas the nonverbal component of our daily communication, such as the tonality of our voice and body language, make up 38% and 55% respectively.

What is the rule of 7 in communication? ›

The Rule of 7 states that a prospect needs to “hear” the advertiser's message at least 7 times before they'll take action to buy that product or service. The Marketing Rule of 7 is a marketing maxim developed by the movie industry in the 1930s.

› article › who-created-the-tra... ›

The transmission model of communication describes communication as a one-way, linear process in which a sender encodes a message and transmits it through a chan...


1. 1.5 Transmission
2. the transmission model of communication
(Zixin Ye)
3. Transmission Model of Communication
4. Transactional Model of Communication
(Communication Coach Alexander Lyon)
5. The 4 Models of Mass Communication Explained
(Timothy Molina)
6. Transaction Model of Communication
(Alex Fish)
Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Prof. Nancy Dach

Last Updated: 03/16/2023

Views: 6376

Rating: 4.7 / 5 (77 voted)

Reviews: 84% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Prof. Nancy Dach

Birthday: 1993-08-23

Address: 569 Waelchi Ports, South Blainebury, LA 11589

Phone: +9958996486049

Job: Sales Manager

Hobby: Web surfing, Scuba diving, Mountaineering, Writing, Sailing, Dance, Blacksmithing

Introduction: My name is Prof. Nancy Dach, I am a lively, joyous, courageous, lovely, tender, charming, open person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.