Assertion (A): Most communication research studies are considered as lopsided.

Reason (R): The studies mainly focus on media exposure, but not on the internalisation of contents.

(A) Both (A) and (R) are true.

(B) Both (A) and (R) are true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).

(C) (A) is true, but (R) is false.

(D) (A) is false, but (R) is true.

Correct Ans: (A)

Explanation:
Many communication research studies appear lopsided because they emphasize media exposure over internalisation. This imbalance leads to partial insights about how communication really works. Researchers often measure how frequently people use media. They track hours spent watching TV, listening to radio, or scrolling online. These surface-level data points are easy to collect and analyze.

However, this focus misses something crucial. It rarely digs into how audiences process, interpret, or internalize what they see and hear. That’s where the deeper understanding lies. Knowing someone watches news daily doesn’t tell us what they believe or how the content shapes their opinions.

The assertion stands true because this imbalance exists widely in research. Scholars frequently acknowledge it as a gap in communication theory and practice. Likewise, the reason also holds true. Many studies stop at measuring exposure, not comprehension or retention. They focus on reach, but not on meaning-making.

This limitation affects how we apply findings. Media planners may know what people watch, but not why they believe what they do. Policymakers might see trends but miss the emotional or cognitive impact behind them.

In conclusion, both the assertion and the reason are accurate. Together, they highlight a major challenge in communication research. To truly understand media effects, researchers must go beyond exposure and study the internal journey of content within the audience’s mind.