Problematic integration theory: a systematic review

ABSTRACT

Problematic integration theory (Babrow, 1992. Communication and problematic integration: Understanding diverging probability and value, ambiguity, ambivalence, and impossibility. Communication Theory, 2(2), 95–130, 2001. Uncertainty, value, communication, and problematic integration. Journal of Communication, 51(3), 553–573) was developed to illuminate communication in relation to distinct but interrelated forms of troublesome meaning (e.g. uncertainty, ambivalence). Since its initial articulation, researchers have applied the theory to investigate communication in a wide range of contexts, including primarily health but also areas such as environmental risk, personal relationships, and organizational communication. This study systematically analyzes 54 applications of the theory, including the contexts to which PI theory has been applied, the key research questions, and methods used in these research applications. Findings of the systematic review are summarized in relation to the theoretical forms of PI and their dynamic relationship with communication. Theoretical implications and suggested directions for future PI research are discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• Problematic integration theory
• ambivalence
• impossibility
• uncertainty
• information seeking
• avoidance
• systematic review

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Correction Statement

This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

1 Not all epistemological uncertainties can be managed by information seeking or avoidance. For example, possessing more information than one can manage requires other sorts of coping strategies (e.g., working out a schema for organizing and evaluating information).

2 For example, the review excluded Gillotti and Thompson’s (2003) conceptual analysis of the potential value of PI theory for medical disclosure and decision-making, Liu et al.’s (2016) discussion of the implications of PI theory for crisis communication, and Repass and Matusitz’s (2010) discussion of the theory’s implications for supportive communication for breast cancer patients. Imaginative applications of the theory were also excluded from analysis (e.g., Babrow, 2010; Babrow & F. J. Babrow, 2019; Babrow & P. B. Babrow, 2019; Babrow & Dinn, 2005).

3 Parsloe and Babrow (2016) recommended a more refined approach: asking first what foci or issues arise in the context, and then asking the form(s) of PI associated with each focus or issue.

4 Or, as Arrington (2010) asked, how can PI theory be used to improve communication in the context?

5 The percentages add up to more than 100% as some applications adopted multiple methodologies (e.g., focus groups and interviews).

6 Note, too, that Babrow and Matthias (2009) differentiated several meanings of ‘acceptance’ that have received little attention in research.

7 The conventional modernist reading of what is commonly called the Great Law of the Iroquois, that in every decision we should consider the effects on the seventh generation, is that we have a responsibility to make such predictions a part of our decision calculus. However, if predicting effects so far in the future is impossible, what then is the meaning of the Great Law? A more sensible interpretation, and one more consistent with the spirit of the culture in which it originated is to live as lightly as possible on the land.