Relationships L9 - 11 Flashcards
What is the prominent difference between face to face and virtual relationships and why does this exist?
- Self-disclosure tends to occur much faster
- Less of a risk that info will be leaked to mutual friends
- Less risk of fear of ridicule/rejection
What analogy is self-disclosure in virtual relationships?
Strangers on a train
Rubin (1975):
- Series of studies where confederates disclosed personal info about themselves to strangers on trains, airport lounges or standing at bus stops
- Found they disclosed intimate details to a stranger next to them , which was often reciprocal
2 major theories explaining virtual relationship:
1) Reduced cues
2) Hyperpersonal model
Who proposed the hyperpersonal model and what is it?
- Walther (1996, 2011)
- Can be more intimate than face to face relationships due to earlier self-disclosure
2 features of hyperpersonal model:
1) Selective self-presentation –> Sender has greater control over what they disclose and the cues compared to face to face. This means relationships can be either hyper honest/hyperdishonest
2) Receiver gains positive impression and feedback of sender, which reinforces selective self-presentation
What did Bargh et al (2002) point out about the outcome of greater self-disclosure?
When anonymous, one feels less accountable for their behaviour so there appears to be no consequences for greater self-disclosure
Who came up with reduced cues theory?
Sprout and Kiesler (1986)
What is reduced cues theory?
- Virtual relationships are less effective than face to face
- They lack many of the cues we depend on in FTF interactions eg NVR cues
- This leads to deindividuation (loss of one’s identity), which leads to disinhibition (feeling freer to communicate bluntly and are less likely to share their real thoughts
What is a gate and who came up with this definition?
- Any obstacle to forming a relationship
- Face to face interactions are gated by things like age, ethnicity
How is gating different in virtual relationships?
Absence of gating allows for greater opportunities for less attractive and shy people to develop a relationship
Strengths and weaknesses of virtual relationships: (+2, -4)
+ Type of self-disclosures used differ in FTF and virtual relationships –> Whitty and Joinson (2000)
+ Research support –> McKenna and Bargh (2000) and Kirdpatrick and Davis (1994)
- NVR cues may be different rather than totally absent –> Walther and Tidwell (1995)
- Lack of support for hyperpersonal model –> Rupel et al (2017)
- Based on mainly Western, technologically developed countries –> Nakanishi (1986)
- Gender differences –> McKenna et al (2002)
What did Whitty and Joinson (2009) do to support the hyperpersonal model?
Summarised evidence showing how self-presentation is manipulated in virtual relationships (hyperhonesty)
How does McKenna and Bargh (2000) support virtual relationships?
Saw that shy, lonely and socially anxious people found it easier to express their true selves more online than FTF
What did Kirdpatrick and Davis show about online relationships by shy people?
- 71% of relationships formed online lasted at least 2 yrs
- In real world, only 49% of these survive
What did Walther and Tidwell show about the difference in cues?
- People in online interactions use other cues like style and message timing
- Acronyms and emojis are not considered as a form of expression
How does the meta-analysis conducted by Rupel et al (2017) show a lack of support for hyperpersonal model?
- Meta-analysis of 25 studies
- Self-report studies showed frequency, breadth and depth of self-disclosure was all greater in FTF relationships
- Experimental research showed no significant differences in FTF and virtual relationships
How are different attitudes to self-disclosure shown by Nakanishi (1986)?
In contrast to American culture, women in Japan preferred lower levels of self-disclosure due to cultural norms
In what other ways do virtual relationships lack cultural validity?
Some countries do not have internet tech readily available to them
What gender differences did McKenna et al (2002) identify>
- Women tended to rate their relationships as more intimate and valued self-disclosure
- Men valued activities-based self-disclosure and hence rated online relationships as less close than face-to-face ones
- Suggests research may show alpha-bias
Parasocial relationship:
One sided unreciprocated relationship usually with a celebrity where a person spends a lot of emotional energy, time and commitment
Who developed the celebrity attitudes scale (CAS)?
McCutcheon et al (2002)
Who used a large-scale survey to develop the 3 levels of a para social relationship?
Maltby et al (2006)
What are the 3 levels of a parasocial relationship?
1) Entertainment Social (Giles and Maltby)
2) Intense Personal
3) Borderline pathological
Entertainment social phase:
- Least intense
- Source of entertainment and topic of light-hearted gossip
- Most people engage in this
Intense personal:
- More intense
- Taking an interest in celebrity’s personal life - Typical of teenagers
Borderline pathological:
- Most intense
- Takes celebrity worship to an extreme eg obsessive fantasies, spending large sums of money
- People believe this person would reciprocate if they met in real life
2 theories explaining parasocial relationships:
- Absorption addiction model
- Attachment theory
Who proposed the absorption-addiction model and what did she suggest?
- McCutcheon (2002)
- People engage in celebrity worship to compensate for deficiencies in life
- Allows them to achieve fulfilment and adds purpose
- Achieving fulfilment motivates intense attachment to celebrity (absorption)
- Individual needs to increase dose to gain satisfaction, which leads to more delusional thinking (addiction)
Strengths and weaknesses of absorption-addiction model: (+2, -2)
+ Research support –> McCutcheon et al (2016), Maltby et al (2005), Schiappa et al (2007), Greenwood and Long (2009)
+ Useful and universal application –> Maltby (2003)
- Conflicting research evidence –> Chory-Assad and Yanen (2005)
- Nomothetic
How does attachment theory link to parasocial relationships?
Ainsworth suggested individuals who formed insecure-resistant relationships w/ caregiver in early childhood would be more likely to form parasocial relationships
Strengths and weaknesses of attachment theory as an explanation for parasocial relationships: (+2,-2)
+ Research support –> Kienlen et al (1997), Cole and Leets (1999)
+ Explains why people all over world have a desire to form parasocial relationships –> Dinkha et al (2015)
- Conflicting research evidence –> McCutcheon et al (2006)
- Correlational not causational
Kienlen et al (1997):
- Supports attachment theory
- Investigated experiences of stalkers
- Found 63% of pps experienced loss of caregiver in early childhood
- 50% experienced emotional and physical abuse
Cole and Leets (1999):
- Investigated parasocial relationships adolescents developed with TV personalities
- Teenagers with insecure-resistant attachment types were more likely to develop this
How does Dinkha et al (2015) show cross-cultural validity?
- Compared 2 contrasting cultures –> Kuwait and UK
- Found people with insecure attachment in both cultures were more likely to form an intense parasocial relationship
How does McCutcheon et al (2006) show conflicting evidence?
- Examined correlation between attachment type and celebrity worship levels using 229 pps
- No link between insecure-resistant attachment and more intense parasocial relationships
How did McCutcheon et al (2004) show correlational evidence?
- Low levels of education are associated with high levels of parasocial relationships
- Attachment theory is not conclusive in explaining parasocial relationships
