{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020161290322580645, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.313559322033898, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Reductionists and Political Communication Research: The Gaps Between Conduct and Utility

The reductionism-holism debate rages on. Neither side appears willing to concede points to the other. Our abilities to understand (much less to predict or, heaven forbid, to ameliorate) the human condition are thus hindered by the limitations of proponents of either perspective. Nowhere is this problem more evident than in the study of political communication research, especially as it has been developed in the United States. This tradition of reductionist, ahistorical inquiry has severely hampered the ability of scholars to come to a rich understanding of either politics or communication. The problem may inhere to the reductionist-holist debate.