#2 - synchronous chats

For this week’s assignment, I entered the synchronous chats as “chatsq” and received a private message from “ayseema”. The chat room itself moved incredibly quick, in accordance with Wallace’s description. Other characteristics of the environment involving synchronicity, persistence, and anonymity were as follows:

Synchronicity: highly synchronous. Often three to four discussions took place simultaneously with responses with in seconds.

Persistence: older dialogue disappeared as new responses were entered. The space was highly evanescent with high recordlessness

Anonymity: the chat was highly anonymous by default, but based on personal user discretion, the space allowed increased visibility, audibility and self-expression through the use of web cameras, profile information, avatars, and font color.

After the inital "Hello", I immediately learned my target’s Age/Sex/Location (a/s/l). He stated himself to be m/34/aussie. My impression of him immediately formed using these social categories. After further discussion, he claimed to be a mechanic originally from India now at Australia for four years. Within less than two minutes, my visual representation of him changed drastically with only information of basic social categories.

By the end of the discussion I did not have a clear idea of who “ayseema” was but had a general feeling of his big 5 traits:

Neuroticism: low. “ayseema” seemed very relaxed and apt at handling stress. He talked about working for a longer time in order to become more successful with little anxiety.

Extraversion: unknown; could not say. I was not able form a clear opinion in regards to his extraversion.

Agreeableness: high. “ayseema” wrote many complements and notes of encouragement. He responded well to jokes and responded openly to questions.

Conscientiousness: unknown. I could not form a clear opinion in this regard, though we did talk about success but was not in depth.

Openness: medium. “ayseema” seemed apt to new experiences and learning more about a variety of topics.

Based on these traits, I had a vague impression of “ayseema with a relaxed overall state. Through verbal cues, my target did not use any emoticons or symbols but used “u” for you and “kewl” for cool. Through interpersonal probes I learned his ASL which I also disclosed as well as his origins, intended career, and hobbies. It was hard to determine whether any answers he provided were indeed true, and I was on the lookout to detect deception from the start.

In terms of theory, my experience in synchronous chats included a variety of factors from several theories. I had a vague overall impression of my target that did seem more enhanced as he gave more cutes, much like the Social Presence Theory. The lack of a variety of cues through CMC did lead me to be harsher and show less etiquette when talking to “ayseema” which follows the Reduced Social Context Cues. Finally, my interaction with “ayseema” supported elements of the Hyperpersonal Theory in regards to the fact I focused on what I thought about his words, created more intense impressions when he described his origins and career, and after I revealed I was a student with the intention of becoming a banker, he began to emphasize his interest in the news and finance. More portrayal of behavioral confirmation ocurred as he labeled himself "us poor guys," and he became more condescending of his own position.

My impression was more in line with the CFO perspective: low breadth, low intensity. Most of the big five traits listed above were with little certainty and gathered from a single response. My impression of “ayseema” did not feel exaggerated.