L9 - Virtual Relationships In Social Media

Question 1

What does FtF stand for

Answer 1

Face to face

Question 2

One main difference between FtF & virtual relationships

Answer 2

• self-disclosure occurs much faster - due to anonymity associated with online relationships
• ppl don’t disclose personal info in real life for fear of ridicule/rejection unless they know they can trust them & info won’t be leaked to mutual friends
• less risk of this in virtual relationships so people share personal info without much risk of the intimate info getting to the people they know

Question 3

What is self-disclosure in virtual relationships compared often to?

Answer 3

• the ‘strangers in a train’ analogy
• Rubin (1975) carried out a series of studies where confederates (ppl part of experiment) disclosed personal info about themselves to strangers on a train/bus stil
• found when confederate disclosed intimate details of their life to a stranger it was often met with reciprocal self-disclosure from the stranger

Question 4

Theories that explain virtual relationships

Answer 4

2 main & contrasting theories:
- hyperpersonal model
- reduced cues theory

Question 5

The hyperpersonal model

Answer 5

• walther (1996, 2011) proposed virtual relationships can be more personal & involve greater self-disclosure then FtF ones as they can develop very quickly as self-disclosure happens earlier
• once self-disclosure is established these relationships tend to be more intense/intimate
• as one can be anonymous online it can lead to more self-disclosure - Bargh et al (2002) says it’s like the ‘strangers on the train’ experiment
• when other people don’t know you, you feel less accountable for your behaviour so you self-disclose more
  There are 2 key features of the hyperpersonal self-disclosure in virtual relationships

Question 6

2 key features of hyperpersonal self-disclosure in virtual relationships

Answer 6

1) sender of messages has greater control over what they disclose & cues they send compared to FtF - it’s selective self-presentation - the sender manipulates their self-image & present themselves in an idealised way. To achieve this self-disclosure can be intensely truthful (hyperhonest) and/or intensely false (hyperdishonest)
2) receiver gains a +ve impression if the sender & may even send +ve feedback which will reinforce the sender’s selective self-presentation

Question 7

Reduced cues theory (RCT)

Answer 7

• Sproull & Kiesler (1986) state that virtual relationships are less effective then FtF ones as they lack many cues that we normally depend on in FtF interactions
• include non-verbal cues such as appearance & cues to our emotional state such as facial expressions/tone of voice
• then reduces person’s sense of individual identity - de-individuation leading to disinhibition
• people then feel freer to communicate more bluntly & aggressively
• people are less likely to want express their real thoughts & feelings to someone who is so impersonal

Question 8

What’s a gate?

Answer 8

• McKenna & Bargh (1999) say a gate is any obstacle to forming a relationship - FtF interactions are gated as there are many features that interfere with early relationship development such as unattractiveness, stammer, shyness etc..
• in real life attraction is influenced by appearance, mannerisms & other factors such as age/ethnicity - limits choice of potential partners
• in virtual relationships these gates are absent - more opportunities for shy & less attractive people to develop relationships
• when relationships move from virtual to FtF they rarely decrease an already developed attraction due to intimacy from more open self-disclosure
• absence of gating also means that people can establish virtual identities they could never create face to face e.g. shy person can become outgoing

Question 9

Evaluation

Answer 9

strengths
- evidence
- research support
weaknesses
- different cues
- lack of support
- cross-cultural validity
- gender differences

Question 10

Evidence

Answer 10

• some evidence that FtF & virtual relationships differ in self-disclosure used
  E.g. Whitty & Johnson (2009) summarise evidence showing how self-presentation is manipulated in virtual relationships - questions in online relationships tend to be direct, probing & intimate (hyper honest) - supporting hyperpersonal model that there is more self-disclosure online
• FtF convos tend to feature more small-talk which is different to online
• online self-presentation can be hyperdishonest e.g. inventing attractive personal qualities for online dating profiles such as being more sociable then you are

Question 11

Research support

Answer 11

• McKenna & Bargh (2000) looked at online communication by shy, lonely & socially anxious people & found that these people were able to express their ‘true selves) more that in FtF situations
• of the romantic relationships that initially formed online by shy people, 71% survived at least 2 years in comparison to shy people who met FtF
• in the real world, 49% of shy people survived their relationship (Kirkpatrick & Davis (1994)) suggesting that shy people do benefit online in relationships due to the absence of gating

Question 12

Different cues

Answer 12

• a limitation of RCT is that it’s been arugued that rather then nonverbal cues being absent online they may be different
  E.g. walther & Tidwell (1995) point out that in online interactions use other cues e.g. style and timing of messages e.g. if take too long then a snob
• also another difference is acronyms such as lol & emojis can all be used as effective substitutes for facial expressions & tone of voice
• RCT fails to explain & recognise how virtual relationships can be just as personal as FtF ones

Question 13

Lack of support

Answer 13

• Lack of support for the hyperpersonal model
• Rupel et al. (2017) carried out a meta-analysis of 25 studies that compared self-disclosure in FtF & virtual interactions
• found that self-report studies showed the freq, breadth & depth of self-disclosure and greater in FtF relationships
• experimental research in self-disclosure showed no significant differences in FtF & virtual relationships which contradicts the hyperpersonal model in that more intimacy & virtual relationships should lead to more self-disclosure than FtF relationships

Question 14

Cross-cultural validity

Answer 14

• research is based on experiences of mainly western technologically developed cultures
• internet tech isn’t readily available in some countries so conclusions abt development & effects of virtual communication on romantic relationships can’t be applied to them
• Nakanishi (1986) found that contradicting Americans, women in Japan preferred lower levels of self-disclosure in relationships
• highlights how self-disclosure depends on cultural norms and may affect communication styles online
• lowers validity of research into virtual relationships, limiting range of relationships it explains

Question 15

Gender differences

Answer 15

• McKenna et al. (2002) found women tended to rate their relationships formed online as more intimate & valued self-disclosure esp. in regards to emotion more highly then men
• men preferred activities based (such as common interests) disclosure & rated their online relationships as less close then face-to-face ones
• suggests that research into online relationships may show alpha-bias as it assumes that males & females experiences of virtual relationships are different
• but could be that experiences of virtual relationships are similar and there are methodological issues with the research that exaggerate the difference (e.g. Choice of interview/questionnaire)