Assignment #5: long-disance relationships... is CMC really sufficient??

Patricia Wallace defines four factors that contribute to attraction, which plays a key role in the development of relationships: 1) physical attractiveness, 2) proximity, 3) common ground, and 4) disinhibition effects. Physical attraction, she argues, is the most important factor because people tend to get to know eachother after a physical attraction has been established. However computer mediated communication has led to a reversal in this sequence; individuals often get to know eachother first, and then trade pictures or meet so that an attraction can form before physical judgement is passed. Next, proximity is essential for any relationship, as familiarity breeds attraction. Traditionally, proximity comes from face-to-face interaction, but the rise in CMC has allowed proximity to exist in a psychological space that doesn't involve physical connection. Common ground is also important in forming relationships; those with shared ideas, assumptions, and beliefs tend to be more attracted to each other than to individuals with conflicting beliefs. Lastly, disinhibition effects refer to the tendency of individuals to reveal more about themselves as they become closer with an individual. This is often a challenge to do in a face-to-face situation, but CMC provides buffers that often allow individuals to become increasingly disinhibited.

My current relationship is an interesting one that involves all of Wallace's four attraction factors. It developed while I was studying abroad, initially based purely on physical attraction and then perpetuated because our proximity. Living in the same building, and experiencing an entire new culture together allowed us not only to become familiar with each other, but also allowed us to create a lot of common ground. Wallace differentiates between two different types of common ground: conversational (actually talking about shared beliefs) and categorical (assumptions of shared beliefs based on groups). Because J and I were in the same abroad situation, we knew we had a certain categorical common ground (i.e. travelling, getting to know new places, etc.). The proximity and physical attraction then allowed us to have conversational common ground. At the end of our abroad experience, J and I made the difficult decision to continue this relationship despite that fact that we are from different states and go to different schools. Thus, the entire basis of our relationship (physical attraction and proximity) was removed and the nature of our relationship changed to one that was now much more based on mediated communication. Initially, we struggled a lot over the phone and on instant messenger. It seemed that the removal of proximity took away the most important element of our relationship. However we soon discovered that if we used email as a mode of communication, our conversation became much more significant. The asynchronous space allowed us to both structure out thoughts and had a largely disinhibiting effect on each of us as individuals. Suddenly, topics that were never brought up in our face to face relationship were carefully worded and easily expressed via email. The use of email as a mode of communication was a hyperpersonal process because we both changed our mode of selective self-representation. Furthermore, the categorical common-ground that I mentioned earlier became much less pronouced in this long-distance relationship, and we had to make the shift towards conversational common ground, achieved through mediated communication. Now, after having been in this long-distance relationship for several months, I feel that our relationship has reached an entirely new level because the mediated communitation has forced us to become more serious and deep in our interaction. My current relationship certainly has made use of all four of Wallace's attraction factors. It has become evident that our face-to-face relationship was based largely on physcial attraction and proximity, but that mediated communication has helped us grow, especially on the levels of common ground and disinhibition effects.