For this assignment, I chose option 2. Although I had to choose some form of media for all of my social interactions this weekend, two stood out as more unique then usual: I needed to confront my housemate about not doing her share of the weekly chores, and I chose to lie to an acquaintance about not going to her dinner party. For the first situation, I chose face-to-face and calmly asked my housemate why she wasn’t keeping up her end of our four-person agreement. For the second situation I chose a mediated channel – text messaging – and claimed to be misinformed about the time and date of a dinner party (after the fact) since I felt uncomfortable attending. After considering my choice of media for each interaction, I realized that my patterns and reasoning fell in place with O’Sullivan’s model.
I chose to confront my housemate face-to-face because I wanted to be very clear about the issue at hand in order to ensure its resolution. This goes quite well with O’Sullivan’s idea of the clarity – ambiguity dialectic. I needed to choose a media that would allow me to be clear in my intentions, without angering my housemate or leaving room for misconceptions. Since the locus was on my housemate, I didn’t feel as inclined to choose a mediated channel. However, my choice in this matter may also reflect how well I know my housemate, the fact that I’m comfortable confronting her in such matters, and my desire to be amiable too. I believed a face-to-face interaction would give me more control over the confrontation and prevent any unnecessary controversy since we could engage in a completely synchronous discussion.
On the other hand, when I decided to lie to an acquaintance I chose text messaging which was probably related to personal self-presentational issues. I preferred a mediated channel because I didn’t necessarily want to be clear, or allow for cues that would suggest I was lying. I wanted to keep my white lie as simple and ambiguous as possible so as not to damage our relationship, or my self-presentation. In accordance with O’Sullivan’s model, I chose a mediated interaction when the locus was myself and the valence was negative. This may not have been the most efficient method of explaining my absence, but for something so minor, it certainly felt safer and easier.
In general, both of these media selections reflected ideas in O'Sullivan's model.
comments:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3186874989969223722&postID=5257425541769748811
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3186874989969223722&postID=5687063778743527603
2 comments:
Kayla,
You gave great, detailed examples of your interactions with people. I think you made great points for both situations and explained how O’Sullivan’s theory applied, even though the two situations were very different. In the second example, I feel like I can definitely relate to the decision you made and think that most people tend to confirm O’Sullivan’s theory when faced with a similar situation. Particularly with an acquaintance, people prefer to break the negative news via a mediated interaction in order to avoid being caught in a lie.
In the first example, I think you could also apply the media richness theory. Since the situation with your roommate was rather ambiguous and required clear explanation, you opted to use a rich media source. Had you used a lean media source, your intentions may have been misconstrued and communication would not have been effective. Therefore, the decision talk to your roommate in person is an example of the media richness theory.
Kayla,
You fit those examples in perfectly wtih the theories. I would have chosen the same media in those situations, too. It is definitly easier to communicate face to face when the locus of the communication in someone other than yourself. I also agree that this fits in with media richness theory, you selected a rich medium for your first communication because your message was equivocal enough to require active management of its percieved meaning. Your choice of medium in your second communication also strongly supports media richness theory, as you chose a lean medium to send a highly unequivocal message.
Post a Comment