Virtual relationships Flashcards
What is the reduced cues theory of virtual relationships?
Sproull and Kiesler found that virtual relationships are less effective than face-to-face ones as they lack many of the cues we normally depend on in face-to-face interactions. These include non-verbal cues such as our physical appearance and especially cues to our emotional state (facial expressions, tone of voice). This reduces a persons sense of individual identity in virtual relationships which in turn leads to disinhibition. Many people feel freer to communicate in blunt and even aggressive ways so are unlikely to express their real thoughts and feelings to someone in such an impersonal way.
What is the hyperpersonal model of virtual relationships?
Walther argues that virtual relationships can be more personal and involve greater self disclosure than face-to-face ones because virtual relationships can develop very quickly as self disclosure can happen earlier and once established the relationships are more intense and intimate.
- The sender of a message has greater control over what to disclose than in a face-to-face situation. This is selective self-penetration. The sender manipulates their self image to present themselves in an idealised way. Easier to manipulate self-disclosure.
-The receiver gains a positive impression of the sender and may give feedback that reinforces the senders selective self-presentation.
Another factor that promotes online self-disclosure is anonymity. When you are aware that other people do not know your identity, you feel less accountable for your behaviour and so you may well disclose more about yourself to a stranger than to even your most intimate partner.
Define selective self-penetration.
When a person has greater control over that to disclose than they would in a face-to-face situation.
What is ‘gating’ in virtual relationships?
A gate is any obstacle to the formation of a relationship.
What are the effects of gating in virtual relationships?
Face-to-face relationships involve many features that can interfere with the early development of a relationship. Virtual relationships remove these features.
Examples of gates in virtual relationships.
-physical unattractiveness
-facial disfigurement
-stammer
-social anxiety
What are some benefits of the absence of gating in virtual relationships?
Most of these gates are removed which means a virtual relationship can develop to the point where self-disclosure becomes more frequent and deeper. The absence of gating works by refocusing attention on self-disclosure and away from superficial and distracting features.
Individuals are freed to be more like their ‘true selves’.
What are some limitations of the absence of gating in virtual relationships?
There is a scope for people to create unique identities and deceive people in ways that they could never manage face-to-face. A person could change their gender or age.
Give a strength of research into virtual relationships. (support for the absence of gating).
There is research support into the absence of gating. McKenna and Bargh looked at online communication by shy, lonely and socially anxious people. They found that people were able to express their ‘true selves’ more than in face-to-face situations. Of the romantic relationships that initially formed by shy people online, 71% survived at least two years. This compares with relationships of shy people formed in the offline world (49% in one study)
This suggests that shy people do benefit online presumably because the gating that obstructs face to face relationships is not present online.
Give a limitation of research into virtual relationships (online vs multimodal).
Most relationships are multi-modal (they are generally conducted online and offline and it is not as straight forward to say that they are either/or) In particular, modern relationships use both face-to-face and online media to communicate. What we choose to self-disclose in our online relationship will inevitably be influenced by our offline interactions and vice versa.
Give a limitation of research into virtual relationships (lack of support for reduced cues).
Online nonverbal cues are different rather than absent. Walther and Tidwell point out that people in online interactions use other cues, such as style and timing of messages. For instance, taking time to reply to a social media status may be a more intimate act than an immediate response. But taking too much time could be interpreted as being a snub. Acronyms such as Lol, emoticons and emojis can be used as effective substitutes for facial expressions and tone of voice. This is hard for reduced cues theory to explain because it means that virtual relationships can be just as personal.
