AbstractThe purposesof this study were to investigate: (1) the definitions of communication preferred among 150 randomly selected members of the National Society for the Study of Communication; (2) the respondents' “ideal” referent or symbol when naming the dynamics of the interpersonal sending‐receiving process.A questionnaire was sent to the above individuals, asking them to; (1) rank‐order twelve definitions of communication (frommosttoleastpreferred)—this was the denotative phase of the study; (2) rate the concepts “Communication,”“Speech,” and “Persuasion” on three linear‐graphic scales (of the Osgood, Suci, Tannenbaum type). The first scale measured the respondents' evaluative feelings of these three concepts (“Good to Bad” continuum). The second scale measured their feelings on the potency of the three concepts (“Strong to Weak” continuum). The third scale measured their orientation of the three concepts as to the complexity or simplicity of the terms when used to describe the process (“Complex to Simple” continuum)—this was the connotative phase of the study.Results were based on a 41% return (62 of 150); no follow‐ups were made to contact the non‐respondents. (1) Over‐all rankings for thedenotativephase of the study indicated that respondents preferred the communication definitions of: J. Ruesch and G. Bateson, first; W. Weaver, second; L. Thayer, third; S. Stevens, fourth; C. Hovland, fifth; C. Cherry, sixth; P. Tompkins, seventh; W. C. Redding, eighth; W. Schramm, ninth; T. Newcomb, tenth; E. Sapir, eleventh; and G. Miller, twelfth. Analysis of variance indicated the rankings to be significant at the .001 level. (2) The profile of mean scores in theconnotativephase of the study indicated that respondents evaluated the concept “Communication” to be much better than the concepts “Speech” or “Persuasion.” The mean scores of the oriented activity scales indicated that “Communication” was perceived by the subjects to be “extremely complex,” whereas “Speech” and “Persuasion” were both viewed as being only “moderately complex.” Results from both the denotative and connotative phases of this study strongly suggested that there was much disparity among the