Although I’ve actually attempted several long distance relationships in my life – including one that lasted well over a year – the one that I think would be most interesting to analyze here is one I have more recently begun. What makes this relationship particularly interesting is that we’ve had very little face-to-face contact, but communicate almost daily via email. Although we sometimes chat over instant messaging, only rarely do we communicate over the phone or by any other means of rich media.
I met this person about four weeks ago when he showed up at my apartment with his younger brother, who happens to be my neighbor. After an unconvincing invitation, and much coercion from my apartment-mate, I reluctantly agreed to take a break from my work and join the small gathering next door. In retrospect, I am very glad I did because I met an interesting new friend. “Adrian” and I spent the rest of that night and the next day talking and getting to know each other before he left for home (New York City). Since then, we’ve kept in touch over the Internet, and he plans to visit again soon.
Perhaps our choice of a mediated and lean communication channel for remaining friends reflects a generation of technology obsessed/savvy young adults, but I think it’s more likely a reflection of our common interests. This brings me to the first factor in Wallace’s model that I find specifically relevant to my experience. Wallace claims that common ground is an important attraction factor, and I agree. This includes mutually shared beliefs, assumptions, and propositions. It also includes conversational and categorical commonalities. “Adrian” and I bonded on all of these fronts. We shared a common interest in computers – especially things related to the Internet (perhaps this is why it has been so easy to keep in touch via email), but also in keeping extremely busy, outdoor activities, dangerous sports, sense of humor, coffee, opinions, pet peeves, etc. Obviously, we didn’t match on everything we discussed in our short time together, but the proportion of common ground to disparities was surprisingly high – and in agreement with the Law of Attraction, I was immediately attracted to him as a result. Since synchronous conversations between us are infrequent, this proportion of common ground has remained quite high.
The second Wallace attraction factor I found most relevant to my situation with “Adrian” is the Distribution effect. This factor deals with Hyperpersonal processes (i.e. over-attribution and selective self-presentation) and the role of self-disclosure in relationship development (a higher degree of self-disclosure is theorized to facilitate relationship development). Since we have been communicating through a mediated method, the over-attribution and selective self-presentation processes have emerged – which I noticed once I started to think about our interactions in a theoretical context. I am very careful in my emails to “Adrian”, and I imagine he censors his in a similar manner. This carefully crafted selective self-presentation narrows our topics to common ground, and characteristics we enjoy about each other. This then further promotes the over-attribution process. We may agree on a very simple issue or express another subtle similarity, and the lack of additional cues intensifies our mutually positive response. There is even some behavioral confirmation in our communication. I find myself replicating the type of messages and conversations to which he responds especially well. Over time, we have become quite close and I feel like I know “Adrian” very well. Self-disclosure has certainly aided this progression. By communicating daily we have shared many stories, experiences, and pieces of information about ourselves with each other. In sum, though I only knew “Adrian” in person for about 24 hours, I am quite fond of him because of our online relationship development – much of which can be explained using Wallace’s ideas.
comments:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3186874989969223722&postID=385623541247901584
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3186874989969223722&postID=6306258261571934981
1 comment:
Hi Kayla,
You picked a great example of a relationship involving mostly mediated communication. I find it very interesting that you and Adrian communicate over e-mail than the phone. Why do you think this is so? My best friend from home and I keep in touch via phone, but we both have to clear an agreed time in our schedules. Perhaps e-mail is asynchronous, and more convenient to communicate when you have the time. Your mentioning of selective self-presentation as aided by e-mail is interesting. I wondered if you could be more specific and give an example of you using selective self presentation.
Overall, great job explaining and applying the theories!
Post a Comment