HC5. Online Support Seeking Flashcards
Support seeking definition
“the strategy of turning to other people in the face of stressful events”
Types of support (2)
(1) informational support (getting information)
2) emotional support (share story, receive empathic response
Online support seeking pro & con
Pro: wellbeing & self-efficacy
Con: co-rumination (focusing and keep talking about problem with peers)
Co-rumination definition
you keep on talking about your problem with someone else (really go into detail).
Structural support definition
The number and pattern of (in)direct social ties around an individual
Perceived support
- Beliefs about the availability of support
- When in stress, availability of support helps reappraisal of the situation
Chatbots and received support
(1) Instrumental (e.g., groceries) > NO
(2) Informational (e.g., flight ticket) > YES
(3) Emotional > DEBATABLE
Support adequacy
Evaluations of quantity / quality of received support > enough support and good support?
Comparison study A with B
A: perceived social support (availability of support > effective!)
B: support adequacy (quality of support > ineffective)
Cannot compare
Online support groups
An online group where peers share experiences about a common theme (e.g., depression)
Participation styles (3)
(1) reading
(2) responding
(3) posting
Participation in internet support groups depends on (2)
(1) mood (feeling ok = support others / feeling not ok = read or post about self)
(2) community commitment (feeling at home)
Chatbot types (3)
(1) information > pre-defined/sticks to topics the chatbot knows (e.g., Ryanair flight ticket)
(2) emotional > complex, conversation range is larger, therapy
(3) companionship > chatbot as friend (broadest conversations)
Cyberbullying definition
= aggressive behavior through electronic means of communication (e.g., email, SNSs, private messaging), that is intentional and repeated over time towards another person that cannot easily defend him/herself
Reasons for online disinhibition (2)
(1) anonimity
(2) distance to interaction partner
Types of online disinhibition (2)
(1) Benign disinhibition (Online environment lowers thresholds for things that people find hard to talk about offline)
(2) Toxic disinhibitions (nice online, not nice offline)
Self-disclosure definition
Intentional sharing of one’s thoughts, feelings or personal experiences
Disclosure decision model (DDM): subjective utility
How individuals perceive the value of the outcome after self-disclosing (e.g., “Is self-disclosing going to help me: yes/no”)
DDM breadth vs frequency (what happens with these when high utility?)
breadth: number of topics
frequency: number of words (how often you self-disclose)
> more frequent self-disclosure and lower self-disclose breadth
Subjective risk (DDM), predicts…
= potential risks anticipated by the self-disclosure, such as social rejection, betrayal, or making the listener feel uncomfortable
Risk predicts intimacy (degree of personal/intimate information, lower when high risk)
Results study 1 chatbot vs counselor (breadth, frequency, intimacy)
- breadth: more topics discussed with chatbot (less to the point)
- frequency: more words towards counselor
- intimacy: more intimacy towards chatbot (no fear of judgement)
Results study 2 (bystander vs victim: breadth, frequency and intimacy)
- breadth: bystander more topics
- freq: victim more words
- intimacy: bystander more intimate
Results study 3 (perceived anonimity and fear of judgement, breadth/freq/intimacy)
- breadth: more topics towards counselor / bystander-victim equal
- frequency: more words towards counselor / bystander-victim equal
- intimacy: more intimate towards counselor / victim more intimate than bystander
