To set the stage, I have provided a video on the art and science of conceptual thinking. My hope is to provide any future researchers with the ‘why’ behind conceptual explication.
Serena Miller (2023) introduced a seven-step framework for clarifying concepts and developing definitions for measurement and research.
Step I. Collect and Record Relevant Conceptual Interpretations of Construct.
The initial step in defining a concept involves thematic analysis, or becoming familiar with themes of relevant scholarly literature. Reviewing existing literature helps researchers understand the concept’s previous definitions and interpretations. Researchers should be transparent about their search process, documenting databases like Google Scholar and keywords used, as this sampling influences the content examined.
Rodgers and Knafl (2000) examined concept development in nursing. Although the field differs greatly from mass communications, the process follows the same steps. Regarding the literature search, “Ultimately, the goal is to gain comprehensive command of the literature dealing with the concept and to acquire a deep grasp and understanding of it as it has been used across disciplines and over time” (Rodgers & Knafl, 2000).
a. Formal Conceptual Definitions
After collecting sources, researchers should seek formal definitions of the concept. These can be found through explicit scholarly definitions, “concept descriptions, concept measures, and non-scholarly concept definitions” (Miller, 2023).
b. Concept Descriptions
Researchers may encounter a challenge when other scholars do not provide clear definitions. In such cases, analyzing how the researcher describes the content in their writing can help.
c. Concept Measures
When conceptual definitions are absent, examining the measures or scale items used can be helpful. Grouping and reviewing scale items for patterns can aid in inferring the meaning of the concept.
d. Popular Literature
Reviewing popular literature can also assist in defining a concept. Public discourse on emerging phenomena may give “shape to the concept” (Miller, 2023).
Unsplash, 2018
e. Non-scholarly Definitions
Researchers may consult non-scholarly sources like dictionaries or legal definitions when faced with mixed interpretations of their concept.
Step II. Thematically Map Conceptual Definitions.
This step involves collecting all definitions from relevant sources into a table that lists citations and verbatim definitions. The table should also identify key terms and note the field or discipline. From this, researchers can identify core characteristics and themes across sources.
Step III. Map Neighboring Concepts to Determine Boundaries.
After completing the definitions table, researchers should map related, similar, or polar concepts. This helps ensure discriminant validity, or the concept’s distinctness from others. Miller (2023) also recommends placing the concept within a nomological framework to map out causes and effects, aiding in assessing its theoretical usefulness.
Jacob Ormen’s (2021) explication of ‘engagement’ approaches concept mapping through semantic network analysis.
Ormen, 2021
Step IV. Evaluate State of Conceptual Definitions.
When proposing a new or revised definition, researchers should explain its purpose. A definition built from terms of scientific utility is more defensible (Miller, 2023).
Step V. Present Existing, Modified, or New Formal Conceptual Definition.
The goal here is to provide a clear, concise, and practical formal definition that encourages its adoption.
Step VI. Content Validate Conceptual Definitions.
Researchers should seek validation from scholars and experts to confirm that their definition is scientifically accepted and useful.
Step VII. Refine and Present Formal Conceptual Definition.
The final step involves refining the concept to ensure it is “valid and mutually understood,” then presenting it (Miller, 2023).
Reflection
The idea of turning abstract, loosely defined concepts into ones that are rigorously defined is intimidating. This seven-step framework, presented by Miller (2023), ensures precision by breaking the process down into steps.
Of course, there are limitations to this process, such as its time-intensive quality and risk of oversimplifying a term, possibly stripping the concept of its complexity.
What are other scholars’ perspectives on concept development?
McLeod and Pan (2004) presented seven techniques for defining a concept. Researchers can approach this process as one that is common practice in conversation.
Defining a term is a frequently occurring communicative activity in our everyday life. It happens whenever we try to answer ‘what do you mean’ kinds of questions.
(McLeod & Pan, 2004)
Steven H. Chaffee (1991) described concept explication as an iterative process. He states that the process that a researcher undergoes to define a concept “can never be considered complete” (Chaffee, 1991).
This is not, however, a recipe through which one proceeds step-by-step in the sense of the investigator ‘being done’ with one stage once he or she has moved on to the next.
(Chaffee, 1991)
How will Miller’s model influence my own approach to concept explication?
It is important not only to summarize this framework but also to consider how to apply it. Rather than diving headfirst into concept explication, I can approach it systematically. After following the seven steps Miller (2023) provides, only then would I begin to draft a formal definition.
My Suggestions for Future Researchers
Considering the limitations of this framework I provided earlier, I suggest that future researchers be cautious of oversimplification. While creating a concise concept definition that includes essential wording is important for its application to research, the definition should still reflect the complexity of the construct. Approaching concept explication as a collaborative process will support creating a balanced formal definition.
Keywords: concept explication, concept development, formal conceptual definition, measurement, communications research, mass communications
References
Chafee, S.H. (1991). Explication. Communication Concepts I. Sage Publications.
McLeod, J. M., & Pan, Z. (2004). Concept explication and theory construction. InS. Dunwoody, L.B. Becker, D.M. McLeod, & G.M. Kosicki, The evolution of key mass communication concepts. Honoring Jack M. McLeod. Hampton Press.
Miller, S. (2023). A framework for evaluating and creating formal conceptual definitions: A concept explication approach for scale developers. In Ford, L.R., & Scandura, T.A., The Sage handbook of survey development and application. Sage Publications, Limited.
Ormen, J. (2021). Explicating engagement: An exploratory mapping and critical discussion of a contested concept. Participations: Journal of Audience and Reception Studies, 18(1), 244-265. https://www.participations.org/18-01-14-ormen.pdf
Rodgers, B.L., Knafl, K.A. (2000). Concept Development in Nursing: Foundations, Techniques, and Applications. Second Edition. In Schwartz-Barcott, D., & Kim, H. S., An expansion and elaboration of the hybrid model of concept development. W.B. Saunders Company. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285868499_An_expansion_and_elaboration_of_the_hybrid_model_of_concept_development
Lindsay Ashford 
Leave a comment