Final answer:
Boreman's and Burgoon's definitions of theory would differ based on their focuses within communication studies, with one possibly highlighting explanatory principles and the other interactive dynamics. In science, a theory is an evidence-backed explanation, unlike in everyday language where it can mean a mere guess. Laws describe phenomena, while theories explain them, and both differ from models, which are representations to aid understanding.
Step-by-step explanation:
The difference between Boreman's and Burgoon's definitions of theory lies largely in their individual focus within the field of communication studies. Boreman's approach may emphasize different aspects of communication processes compared to Burgoon's. Both would agree that in the scientific context, a theory is an explanation for a range of phenomena that has been substantiated through empirical evidence, as opposed to its everyday use where a theory may imply a mere conjecture or assumption without substantial evidence. For example, Boreman might define theory in terms of explanatory principles within a communication framework, while Burgoon might focus on the interactive or relational dynamics within that framework.
In everyday language, a theory might be understood as a guess or assumption, such as someone theorizing that a woodchuck is responsible for a hole in the ground. Meanwhile, a scientific theory like germ theory in human biology, serves as an explanation that enjoys a high degree of support from empirical data, and is not merely a simple guess. A scientific theory is distinct from a law; while a law describes what happens under certain circumstances, a theory seeks to explain why it happens. Contrasting with a model, which represents a system with the intention of providing an accessible understanding of it, a theory is a more comprehensive explanation of observed phenomena.