Virtual Relationships in Social Media (Relationships) Flashcards
Reduced Cues theory
Sproull and Kiesler (1986)
• Computer mediated communication (CMC) relationships are less effective than face-to face (FtF) because they lack many of the cues on which we depend
• leads to de-individualisation because it reduces people’s sense of individual identity, which encourages disinhibition in relation to others
Disinhibition and Deindividualisation
-Disinhibition: a lack of restraint manifested in disregard for social conventions, impulsivity, and poor risk assessment
-Deindividulisation: a concept in social psychology that is generally thought of as the loss of self-awareness in groups
Joinson (2001) Method
Undergraduate students were recruited to participate in a laboratory study.
Participants were paired (mostly in single sex pairs) and asked to discuss an abstract dilemma which stimulated conversation.
Transcripts of the participant’s discussions were rated on their levels of self-disclosure .
Raters were not told which transcripts came from which condition. Only unprompted disclosures were included (not answers to direct questions) and task-related disclosures (opinion relevant to the task) were not counted.
Condition 1: half of the pairs discussed dilemma face to face and half discussed it from separate rooms using a computer chat programme.
Condition 2: all of the pairs used the chat programme, but half of them also had a video connection, so they could see each other.
Joinson (2001) Results
In experiment 1, participants in the computer condition showed significantly more self-disclosure than the face-to-face participants.
In experiment 2, pairs who could see one another over video had significantly lower levels of self-disclosure than pairs without video.
Joinson (2001) Conclusion
People disclose more about themselves when communicating via computer than they do face to face, and using video reduces the level of self-disclosure in computer communication.
Joinson (2001) Evaluation
Laboratory experiment: variables were controlled and the study can be replicated.
The participants were almost all in same sex pairs, so the results cannot be generalised to communication between people of opposite sexes.
In the first experiment, although the raters were not told which transcripts came from which condition,it is likely they could tell which conversations were held face to face and which happened through computer chat. Rating may have been biased.
Self Awareness and computer communication
• public self awareness: this being aware of how you appear to others
• private self awareness: this is looking inwards - being aware of what is going on inside you head
-Joinson’s study: high or low public and private awareness
• high private self-awareness and low public self-awareness resulted in significantly higher levels of self-disclosure
• anonymity and focusing on your thoughts and feelings to express them in writing
Gating
• in face-to-face relationships, individuals rely on easily discernible physical features such as attractiveness or age to help them decide who would be a suitable partner.
• These features are referred to as ‘gates’ and often prevent those who are less attractive or socially skilled from forming relationships.
McKenna and Bargh (1999)
argued that a huge advantage of CMC is the absence of gating
• this means that a relationship can develop to the point where self-disclosure becomes more frequent and deeper
• this works by refocusing attention on self-disclosure and away from what might be considered superficial and distracting features
• it also means that people are free to create online identities that they could never manage FtF
• this is referred to as the existence in second life
Walther
Walther (1996, 2011) argues online relationships can be more personal and involve greater disclosure than FtF ones.
-This is because CMC relationships can develop quickly as disclosure happens earlier; relationships become more intense and intimate
-also means they can end more quickly because the high excitement is not matched by the level of trust- this is called the Boom and Bust phenomenon (Cooper and Sportolari (1997))
Hyperpersonal Model
according to the model a key feature of self disclosure in CMC is that a person sending a message has the time to manipulate their self image.
-Walther called this Selective Self-Presentation
-means people have control over their disclosure and use it to promote intimacy in CMC by appearing desirable
another feature is anonymity
-Bargh(2002) the outcome of this is rather like the strangers on the train effect: when you are aware that other people don’t know your identity, you feel less accountable for your actions and behaviour
-you may disclose more to a stranger than to an intimate partner
Lack of research support for reduced cues theory
• The theory is wrong to suggest that nonverbal cues are entirely missing from
CMC. They are different rather than absent.
• Walther and Tidwell (1995) point out that people in online interaction use other
cues such as the style and the timing of their message.
• For example – taking the time to reply to an online message is interpreted as
more of an intimate act rather than an immediate response. But not too much
time, otherwise that might be seen as a snub.
• There are subtle differences which can be used in CMC that are similar to FtF
relationships. Acrostics such as LOL, emoticons and emojis, are used as effective
substitutes for facial expressions and tone of voice.
Relationships
Research support for the hyperpersonal model
• The hyperpersonal model predicts that people are motivated to self-disclose in
CMC in ways that are sometimes ‘hyperhonest’ and sometimes ‘hyperdishonest’.
• Whitty and Joinson (2009) have evidence for this.
- When researching a number of online discussions they found that the questions
tended to be very direct, probing and sometimes intimate. These kinds of
questions would never been asked in an FtF meeting as it would be seen as ‘going
too far’.
- FtF discussion tends to be ‘small talk’. It was also found that people had no issue
in answering the personal questions online and were direct and to the point
Support for absence of gating
• McKenna and Bargh (2000) looked at CMC use by lonely and socially
anxious people. They found that these people were able to express
their ‘true selves’ more than in FtF situations.
• Of the romantic relationships that initially formed online, 70%
survived more than 2 years. This is a higher proportion than for
relationships formed in the offline world.
Relationships as multimodal
• Walther (2011) argues that any theory seeking to explain CMC,
including the role of self-disclosure, needs to accommodate the fact
that our relationships are generally conducted online and offline
through many different types of media.
• It is very rarely a straightforward matter of ‘either/or’. This is in fact
probably the central characteristic of many modern relationships.
• What we choose to disclose in our online relationships will inevitably
be influenced by our offline interactions and vice versa.
Relationships
(Evaluation) Types of CMC
-Extent and depth of self-disclosure depends on type of CMC being used
-SNSs (social networking services)- people interacting with each other generally have relationships in the offline world
-people disclose more on Facebook than they are willing to complete am online e-commerce webfor (Paine et al.2006)
-Internet dating: self-disclosure is reduced because communicators anticipate meeting Ftf
-research that approaches CMC as a single concept neglect its variety, lacking validity
