The introduction of pluralistic alternatives for communication theory is accompanied by a responsibility for specification of falsification criteria. This essay examines four necessary links in the falsification of rules propositions from an action perspective. The criteria suggested are an extension of the “covering law” criteria, which are adapted to a recent empirical conception of rules.
Quarterly Journal of Speech
Volume 64, 1978 - Issue 4
![Sample our Language & Literature journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5941/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Language-Literature.jpg"})
Reprints and Corporate Permissions
Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?
To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:
Academic Permissions
Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?
Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:
If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.
Related Research Data
Creating and confronting social order: A comparison of rules perspectives
Source:
Informa UK Limited
Falsification procedures for behavioral research in communication
Source:
Informa UK Limited
Linking provided by
