<i>Human Communication Research</i> at a crossroads: reaffirming standards, reimagining possibilities

Abstract As Human Communication Research begins a new editorial chapter, this editorial reaffirms the journal’s longstanding commitment to theory-driven scholarship while addressing recurring challenges that shape how communication research is conceptualized, designed, and interpreted. Drawing from editorial experience and field-wide observations, I identify ten patterns—such as sidelining theory, prioritizing statistical effects over explanatory mechanisms, and equating analytical complexity with conceptual rigor—that signal misalignments between empirical practice and theoretical ambition. These challenges are mapped onto Chaffee and Berger’s classic evaluative criteria to clarify where theoretical contributions often falter. In response, I outline an editorial vision centered on conceptual coherence, methodological alignment, and integrative theorizing. The editorial also introduces Commentaries and Catalysts, a new column designed to foreground theoretical insight and foster cross-paradigm dialogue. Together, these reflections aim to support authors and reviewers while inviting engagement with the standards, possibilities, and evolving responsibilities of cumulative theory-building in communication research.