Return to search

A Q-sort analysis of how sports information directors of universities in the Mid-American Conference relate to Grunig's four public relations models

This study attempted to examine the public relations activities of sports information departments of universities within the Mid-American conference. The activities were categorized according to James E. Grunig and Todd Hunt's four public relations models.The researcher provided ten sports information directors with thirty-six statements regarding various public relations activities which a public relations department would perform. Each respondent was asked to sort the responses according to how they perceived public relations activities were carried out within their respective departments.The Q-method program was used to determine two factor groups from the ten responses received. Factor I consisted of nine sports information directors and Factor II consisted of one sports information director.While sports information directors in both groups agreed that truth is important in a public relations program (a public information model), the two groups differed significantly in the types of public relations activities they carried out. Factor I respondents perceived their departments as performing a more press agentry/publicity style of public relations (model 1). The Factor II respondent perceived his department more along the lines of two-way asymmetric and two-way symmetric public relations (models 3 and 4). Neither of the two groups practiced each of these models exclusively but rather practiced one dominant form of public relations while using the other models to a lesser extent. / Department of Journalism

Identiferoai:union.ndltd.org:BSU/oai:cardinalscholar.bsu.edu:handle/186308
Date January 1998
CreatorsGraham-Reinhardt, Tamu
ContributorsPopovich, Mark N.
Source SetsBall State University
Detected LanguageEnglish
Formatii, 111 leaves ; 28 cm.
SourceVirtual Press

Page generated in 0.0019 seconds