FOCS Computer Mediated Communication

Question 1

The birth of Computer Mediated Communication

Answer 1

• First there was a computer
• Then came connection (two computers were connected for the first time)
• First message sent on computers is LO
• Thus, starting of CMC → Once connected, people started to communicate
• The early CMC research is based on limited and not as prevalent technology

Question 2

Definition of CMC being based on “text based messages” is wrong as it can be based on video or other modalities

Answer 2

• CMC filter out non verbal cues → Use other form of tools (GIF) to communicate non verbal cues

Question 3

Email

Answer 3

• Micronet 800
• Using phone to dial in computer to Micronet 800 magazine
• Fulfil function of magazine with interpersonal communication. Email and chats are not mass communication tools

Question 4

Bulletin Board System (BBS)

Answer 4

• Grandfather of social media
• Host machine, where everyone dials into the base computer that filters people based on interests
• BBS relies on one-on-one communication between my computer and host computer (certain topic)
• ISP is communication between my computer and any computer (all topic)

Question 5

Cues-Filtered-Out perspective of CMC

Answer 5

• Predominant perspective in early CMC research
• Focus what on the technology itself
• Pay attention to the missing cues in CMC
  
  • Social Presence Theory
  • Media Richness Theory

Question 6

Social Presence Theory

Answer 6

• Idea is degree of salience of the other person in the interaction → Salience is about the other interactant → Degree of how the other interactant is salient in the theory
• Low bandwidth (proxy for less richer forms of media) leads to low social presence
• More, more, more presence of the other person = The better because warmer communication ***

Question 7

Central Claims of SPT

Answer 7

• Communication media vary in its capacity to transmit cues
  
  • Social Media Message vs Phone Call
• Less cues transmitted = Will have Less presence in communication context = Less warmth and involvement perceived
  
  • Low Bandwidth
  • Low Social Presence
  • Impersonal Communication (Feels very cold, not warm)
• CMC is always impersonal compared to face to face

Question 8

Media Richness Theory

Answer 8

• Focus on the richness of medium itself. Presence of the other interactant
  
  • Needs a match between situation and medium ***

Question 9

MRT Centers around

Answer 9

• Centers around the “richness” construct
  
  • Numbers of cues → Immediacy of feedback, Potential for natural language and Potential for personalisation
  • Face to Face (Rich)
  • CMC (Lean)
  • Polar End → Richer vs Leaner
  • Chatting is richer than Email. Chatting → Reply immediately. Email → Not as fast (Immediacy of feedback)
  • Language of art, non verbal language, Code of 010101 (Potential for natural language) → Some may argue using texts like singlish (informal), has more natural language than email (formal) → More natural language is richer medium
  • Potential for personalisation → Allow you to tailor messages specifically → Later on scholars agree this topic is not as important because all mediums allows one to do so

Question 10

MRT Central Claims

Answer 10

• Match between equivocality of message situation (below) and richness of medium (above) produces best outcomes
• Equivocal Communication → Message trying to convey is open to many interpretations → This needs richer medium
  
  • Eg. Unhappy with spouse, difficult conversations, needs a richer medium such as F2F
• Unequivocal Communication → Straightforward (Is there exam tomorrow? This can use leaner communication)

Question 11

Facts about MRT

Answer 11

• Text can make us feel very warm despite the absence of cues
• Text can be the place where the most intense fights occur
• A change in perspective from
  
  • technology-centred approach
  • to communication-process approach
• Why this shift in perspective?
  
  • More complicate use of communication techniques
  • Could not keep up with tech developments

Question 12

SIDE

Answer 12

• Visual Anonymity, Deindividuation, Group Identification and Group Dynamics
• Focus on visual anonymity
• Deindividuation → Lack qualities that makes you a unique individual → Become a zombie
• Visual anonymity strips individuals of unique qualities
• Act differently void of person qualities
• Users act based on groups. As individuals lack individual qualities, they act as part of a group “racial identifiers, school identifiers” → Group Identification
• Groups dynamics → Act like your part of a homogenous group instead of individually

Question 13

Consequences of SIDE

Answer 13

• • Only “us” and them”
  • No “me” and “you”
  • CMC is good for task-oriented communication
  • CMC is not good for interpersonal relationship building
  • Theory used to explain situations with negative consequences motivated by group based mentality
    
    • Eg Cyberbullying/Trolling
  • However, CMC tends to show some details about ourselves. Visual anonymity is not relevant today as we can see person’s profile (Facebook photo)
    
    • But these details do not give a full clear picture of who the person is

Question 14

Deindividuation in SIDE

Answer 14

• Deindividuation may not be as applicable too because when a person gives more information about themselves, we get a sensing on who they are as a person
  
  • But then again, we still do not have the full clear picture
• We are no longer under the realm of SIDE when more information of an individual is given out → Giving a glimpse on the person is
• This necessitates another theory to explain the limitations of SIDE theory

Question 15

Social Information Processing

Answer 15

• Assumptions
  
  • Nonverbal cues are missing in CMC
  • Communications motivated to develop impressions and affinity
  • When nonverbal cues are unavailable , communicators adapt and focus on available cues in CMC
    
    • Other theories forgot the motivation aspect of an individual and will adapt to the situation → Meet needs and form an impression
    • Focus on what is available rather than what’s not available online

Question 16

2 components of SIP

Answer 16

• Verbal Cues: Users need to create full impressions of other based on verbal communication
  
  • Full control over one’s verbal cues
• Time: Exchange of social information through text-only CMC is slower thus more time is needed (x4 for CMC)
  
  • But in similar timeframe, CMC will lose out compared to F2F
  • CMC can be as effective as F2F with more time

Question 17

• Hyperpersonal Model (surpass)
  
  • Sometimes CMC relationships surpasses F2F
  • Four Elements that contribute to this effect

Answer 17

Sender
Receiver
Channel
Feedback

Question 18

HM Sender

Answer 18

• 1) Sender: Selective self-presentation
  
  • Much more controlled and more selective
  • Sender might start to see hyper personal relationships unfold
  • Choosing the best photo of himself
  • Engage in a storytelling style that makes them look better

Question 19

HM Receiver

Answer 19

• 2) Receiver: Over-attribution of similarity
  
  • We only have clues senders chose to give us. Bits and piece of information about others
  • We make internal attribution of others
  • Lack of clues yet we still jump into conclusions
  • Over attribute to info on profile → Idealised image of others
  • This theory states at times, over interprets / over attributes a person’s personality as their ideal type

Question 20

HM Channel

Answer 20

• 3) Channel: On your own time
  
  • Constant
  • CMC can be asynchronous
  • One can plan, contemplate and edit one’s comments more mindfully and deliberatively than F2F
  • Take a lot of time to simulate and revise your emails / social media posts

Question 21

HM Feedback

Answer 21

• 4) Feedback: Self-fulfilling prophecy
  
  • People want their expectations to be confirmed
  • React back reflective of idealised and wonderful perceptions of person
  • Reflect positive perceptions of this person (sender) where the roles reverse
  • From polished selective self presentation → Time spent on revising → Give back the sender a positive glowing reaction from a self presentation → ……

Question 22

Warranting Theory

Answer 22

• Focus on impression formation stage
• Often some disconnection between self and self-presentations online
  
  • People know through some experience how easily claims can be fabricated in CMC

Question 23

Warrant

Answer 23

• A cue that authenticates an online self-presentation
• Provides information about warranting value → The perceived extent to which information is immune to manipulation by the source
• Low = Easily manipulated
• High = Not as easily manipulated
  
  • I’m really good looking → Self promote (Low)
  • She is good looking → Third party (High)
    
    • Don’t look at vendors claim of products
    • Looks at reviews

Question 24

Various factors affect warranting value of information

Answer 24

• Source of information
• Perceived motivations
• Valence of information (people tend to listen more or give warranting value to negative attributions → Why should they be sharing the opposing flipside
• Third parties are more reliable because listener knows they have nothing at stake from making assertions (boost sales etc)

Question 25

Warranting value matters in affecting how much self-presentations has an impact on impressions

Answer 25

Perceive they have external motivation to make such statement → Have lower warranting value as they are too easy to manipulate