Virtual relationships in social media Flashcards
Reduced cues theory
Virtual relationships are less effective due to the lack of non verbal cues (e.g physical appearance, emotional responses)
In ftf (face to face) relationships we rely on these cues
What theory did Sproull and Kiesler propose
Reduced cues theory
Reduced cues theory: De-individuation
Lack of cues about emotional state (voice and facial expressions) leads to de-individuation
LOSS OF INDENTITY
Reduced cues theory: Disinhibition
People then (from de-individuation) feel freer from the constraints of social norms
Leads to blunt and even aggressive communication and a reluctance to self-disclose
LOSS OF RESTRAINT IN RELATIONSHIP
The Hyper Personal Model
- include a name
Walther suggested self-disclosure happens more quickly in virtual relationships, relationships also develop more quickly (due to the lack of other factors)
- Sender has control (selective self presentation) and may be hyperhonest and/or hyperdishonest
- Receiver’s feedback may reinforce sender’s selective self presentation
The Hyper Personal Model: Cooper and Sportolari (Boom and Bust)
Due to high excitement level, we quickly tire of these relationships and can move on from ‘intensely intimidating’ to nothing in a very short period of time
The Hyper Personal Model: Anonymity
Bargh (2000) ‘stranger on a train effect’
- Due to not feeling exposed, you are more likely to share intimate info about yourself than you would in a FTF relationship
Absence of gating
- include names
McKenna and Bargh argue that ‘gates’ (e.g facial disfigurements or a stammer) may be obstacles to a FTF relationship
CMC doesn’t have this
- this allows the relationship to get off the ground by avoiding what could be superficial and distracting features
- it also allows us to make identities we don’t have and wish we did have
What is one strength
Research supports the beneficial effects of virtual worlds on the development of romantic relationships.
Rosenfeld and Thomas (2012) discovered that, of the 4,000 participants in their study, 71.8% of those who had access to the internet were married or had a romantic relationship, whereas only 35.9% of those who did not had the same privilege.
The results support theories of virtual relationships by indicating that people can form and sustain romantic relationships with the support of the virtual world.
What are the 3 limitations
Contradictory evidence of absence gating
Lack of research support for the hypo personal model
Gender differences
Evaluation: Contradictory evidence of absence gating
According to Paine et al. (2006), a website user’s level of self-disclosure varies depending on whether they expect their information to be accessible to a larger public or simply their close friends.
For example, individuals try to project a socially acceptable identity by presenting an ‘edited” version of who they are. In contrast, people are more inclined to share more private information asthey feel more certain that their friends will accept them.
This disputes the claim that all virtual interactions lack gating because information may become publicly known, which could lower the quantity and quality of self-disclosure.
Evaluation: Lack of research support for the hypo personal model
Ruppel et al’s meta analysis compared the frequency, breadth and depth of self disclosures in FTF and virtual relationships
In self report studies self disclosure was greater in FTF relationships on all three measures. In experimental studies there were no significant differences
This challenges the model’s view that greater intimacy in virtual relationships should lead to greater self disclosure than FTF
Evaluation: Gender differences
McKenna discovered that women valued self-disclosure more than men did and tended to rate interactions they developed online as more intimate.
Men valued their FTF connections more than their CMC ones and favoured activities-based disclosure.
This implies that rather than applying studies to both sexes, male and female CMC connections may differ and should be treated differently.