In our study, we each found 10 threads and then compiled them together; we first coded our own threads and then each other’s. Our threads did not come from the same post or the same support group – there were five main posts where we got the threads from among four different support groups: shyness, college admissions, grief, and singles. There were five threads from shyness, three threads from college admissions, two threads from grief, and ten threads from singles.
Even though our inter-reliability percent was unreliable, our results were similar to Braithwaite in terms of the amounts of the different types of social support found. We found the most evidence of information support (20%), esteem support (10%), and emotional support (7%). While these three types of support were also the top three types of support that Braithwaite found, Braithwaite’s percentages of each type of support were different. She found the most evidence of emotional support, then information, and esteem support. We are not really sure why our top three results were different from Braithwaite’s, but we believe it may be due to the types of threads we looked at. For example, the threads in the singles group consisted of short responses to a question that one blogger posed. The question was general and the main post did not include many feelings. So while there was information in most of these threads, there was not as much emotional or esteem support since there was no need to really validate, sympathize, empathize or relieve from blame. In addition to these results, we also found 3% of both network support and humor and did not find any type of tangible assistance.
After discussing our coding decisions, we figured out why our inter-reliability rating was unreliable. There were two main conflicts about the different types of support. The first disagreement was about the difference between information and tangible assistance. One of us considered information as being advice, referrals, and situation appraisal while the other person considered some referrals to be tangible assistance. We talked and then agreed that tangible assistance could only be some kind of physical thing and that referrals and references should be classified as information. After coming to this decision, when we looked back through the threads we found no evidence of tangible assistance. The second conflict was over network support. One person only considered there to be network support if there was a reference to the network in the post such as “post more, we want to listen” or “we need more information,” while the other person considered most of the threads network support because of the overall idea of blogging in a group. Again, we came to an agreement and decided that for there to be network support, there would have to be reference to the presence of the group or people in the group.
When comparing our results to Wallace’s ideas about helping and the numbers factors, we disagreed with this idea. Wallace believes that increased numbers of people reduces helping behavior because of decreased noticeability and diffusion of responsibility. But online, we saw that even a common question, such as “How do I know if a girl likes me” was answered by ten people. We found so many different threads that contained information, emotional, and esteem support, that it is hard to automatically agree with Wallace. We think that because we cannot use others to interpret our environment on the internet, one may find more helping behavior in this anonymous setting. Our results seem to align better with Walther and Boyd’s results where online, anonymity increases the ability to avoid embarrassment and increases one’s confidence in providing support. Social distance, interaction management, and access also play a role in the online support system and may influence people to be more helpful online than offline.
By: Stefani Negrin (Purple Blog) & Whitney Brenner (Green Blog)
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.shyness/browse_thread/thread/410d0f8d3510ae6/2874d813b9bd0eb4?lnk=st&q=how+can+tell+difference+between+a+girl+who+is+interested#2874d813b9bd0eb4
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.college.admissions/browse_thread/thread/cd7549b43f6510f9/c3b7264aa6a72249?lnk=st&q=alt.support.college#
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.grief/browse_thread/thread/65f5c0e8e5ca7439/d9040fcec8ea9053#d9040fcec8ea9053
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.shyness/browse_thread/thread/410d0f8d3510ae6/2874d813b9bd0eb4?lnk=st&q=On+Thursday+this+girl+came+into+my+shop#2874d813b9bd0eb4
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.singles/browse_thread/thread/28f479de02104334/51e2bdb4aa90dc15?lnk=st&q=Nervousness+and+Dating#51e2bdb4aa90dc15
1 comment:
It seems as though a lot of people had information as their highest - my group did as well! As I stated in my last comment, I think it's because people are specifically looking for people to respond to that have experienced something they have. It's easy to give a lot of information and maybe a little more difficult to get emotional or esteem support because you don't physically know the person with the problem.
Post a Comment