For example, it has been debated whether or not communication scientists should study cognition. It is debated whether communication theory should describe only overt behaviors without reference to mental processes or structures. From what I have learned over many years of looking at both social constructions of realities and cognitive aspects of behavior and communication is that scientists will choose whatever aspect of communication they wish to study and dig deeper in that area. There is nothing wrong with that as long as final explanations of communication recognize that dualist separations are not useful. The study of communication involves the study of interaction between systems and the formation of feedback loops between sub-systems forming a a larger system of interdependent message exchangers.
Dualism is problematic for the study of communication once that assertion is accepted.
We see that cognitions are affected by social behavior and vice versa. According to the brilliant psychologist William James, William James human actions occur in relation to human purposes which are in the minds of individuals. James helps us to realize that human actions are teleonomic. He did not see purpose as passive, but rather described the environment as sometimes being obstructive to the active movement people take in attempting to fulfill goals. According to James, purposive behavior is a fixed end and paths toward goals are modified indefinitely as an individual adapts in ways known in systems theory as equifinality.