I think that in the future, as new technologies are created, we will see even more computer mediated communication. It will be interesting to see how people will respond to new technology. Right now, so many of us are online all of the time to the point that problematic internet use has been recognized as a type of problem. So will we eventually “correct ourselves” and focus more on ftf interactions with future generations? Will we ever stop and say enough is enough? Children are getting on the computer at younger and younger ages, will it ever become a TV replacement? Overall, I think it will be fascinating to see how we will continue to deal with the new media, how we will raise our kids in a media-dominant society and the different directions the media will move in.
While I believe this new technology will change theories we hold now about impression formation, I think that some of the basic ideas of theories will stay the same. With regards to the Cues Filtered Out Perspective, I think that it will slowly start to fade and not really be used anymore. At this point in time, it is not truly accurate of the impressions people make online, so in the future, I do not think it will be used. However, I think that the Social Information Processing Theory and the Hyperpersonal model will continue into the future. People will continue to adapt cues into the verbal channel and while I think that the length of time needed to get an impression similar to ftf will keep getting shorter, for now, time is still needed. With the hyperpersonal model, I think that online, because people can, they will try to portray themselves in the best way possible and selectively self present certain cues, and then will over attribute the few cues they receive. While it may be harder to do this in the future, I do not think it will go away very quickly.
A topic that might be a part of psychology of social computing in the future is virtual classrooms. Will they become common in colleges and universities? What does a community look like in this type of “classroom,” do students do better or worse, should there even be virtual classrooms? Classes right now have changed to keep up with cmc with powerpoints instead of writing on the board and discussion boards online. Will education continue to move in a cmc direction?
Monday, December 3, 2007
Magic 8 Ball of the Psychology of the Internet
Technological determinism, the view that the availability of technology dictates our behaviour, probably wouldn't hold up very well. Technology will no doubt improve in the future and will probably make CMC come very close to FtF communication, but our interactions over CMC will still maintain a considerable distance from our FtF interactions. Even if the technology is available, people will probably still choose not to use some of it.
Visual anonymity will still remain a big part of the reason people are so attracted to the Internet. You can actively interact with other people, but they don't have to see you at the moment. Even though Social Distance Theory mostly applies to lying over CMC, it is still an indication of our comfort level over various social distances. On some days, all of us will feel both the need for company and the lack of desire to make ourselves presentable. Even more fundamentally, we rely on the lack of non-verbal cues to shield us from judgment and help us become a more ideal self (out of the four aspects of the "self). Cues Filtered Out, instead of a negative thing, will precisely be the main attraction of the Internet. It allows for the effective removal of gating features. Even with the technology available now (webcam, video conference, etc), we still choose to remain anonymous. A friend recently told me that he only uses his webcam for close friends and family. So if a chatroom requires webcam communication to make CMC closer to FtF, the chatroom will probably have a rocky future because it is ripping through most people's safety blanket of anonymity.
So a fundamental thing that will stay the same even as technology changes is people's mentality to stay behind the veil of anonymity. Even if technology allows for it, people would not want to make CMC too much like FtF. This will, to some degree, limit the market for some new technology. That's why the webcame market is not as big as one would think it should be. (Come on, long-distance visual communication? That should be a hot item straight out of a cool sci-fi movie. But it's not.)
A future issue that we may want to discuss in this class is Internet crimes. We covered a little bit of it during the Digital Deception unit. But there are so many of them out there! Why do we feel okay downloading movies and music illegally while we won't normally walk out of a store with a CD under our jackets? Does CMC actually diminish our feelings of right and wrong and confuse our moral compass? That would be a very interesting phenomenon to study.
Visual anonymity will still remain a big part of the reason people are so attracted to the Internet. You can actively interact with other people, but they don't have to see you at the moment. Even though Social Distance Theory mostly applies to lying over CMC, it is still an indication of our comfort level over various social distances. On some days, all of us will feel both the need for company and the lack of desire to make ourselves presentable. Even more fundamentally, we rely on the lack of non-verbal cues to shield us from judgment and help us become a more ideal self (out of the four aspects of the "self). Cues Filtered Out, instead of a negative thing, will precisely be the main attraction of the Internet. It allows for the effective removal of gating features. Even with the technology available now (webcam, video conference, etc), we still choose to remain anonymous. A friend recently told me that he only uses his webcam for close friends and family. So if a chatroom requires webcam communication to make CMC closer to FtF, the chatroom will probably have a rocky future because it is ripping through most people's safety blanket of anonymity.
So a fundamental thing that will stay the same even as technology changes is people's mentality to stay behind the veil of anonymity. Even if technology allows for it, people would not want to make CMC too much like FtF. This will, to some degree, limit the market for some new technology. That's why the webcame market is not as big as one would think it should be. (Come on, long-distance visual communication? That should be a hot item straight out of a cool sci-fi movie. But it's not.)
A future issue that we may want to discuss in this class is Internet crimes. We covered a little bit of it during the Digital Deception unit. But there are so many of them out there! Why do we feel okay downloading movies and music illegally while we won't normally walk out of a store with a CD under our jackets? Does CMC actually diminish our feelings of right and wrong and confuse our moral compass? That would be a very interesting phenomenon to study.
Sunday, December 2, 2007
An Unknown and Exciting Future
Throughout this year, we have studied numerous theories and phenomena regarding social computing and its psychological effects. Although no one can truly know what the future will hold, we always have and will continue to make predictions. As the world becomes more dependent on computers and the Internet, I believe a few theories in particular will hold true. First, the Hyperpersonal Model, as CMC will always lead to a reduced breath of content (there is only so much you can learn over the Internet about a person) and consequently lead to an increased intensity in attributions. In addition, a few others include Media Richness Theory, Social Distance Theory and the Feature-based Model of deception. In terms of the former, as our society becomes increasingly computer dependent (with online dating becoming even more popular with time), there will always be a need for a match between the equivocality of a task and the appropriate means of communication. As for the latter, I believe an increase in social computing dependence will lead to increased problems with Internet deception, and therefore, both theories will be important, as they predict which medium will be used for different forms of deception. Finally, Caplin’s Theory on Problematic Internet Use will also hold, as greater social computing dependence will lead to greater PIU symptoms.
A few theories that will not be applicable in the future include Social Presence Theory, Reduced Social Context Cues and Social Information Processing. As we are currently seeing trends toward increased Internet dating (and modality switching actually working), these theories that predict less social presence, poorly developed and negative impression formation, and slower impression formation in CMC, respectively, will not hold in the future. Moreover, if these were even entirely true today, I do not believe there would be such an increase in Internet dating.
Certainly, we have learned quite a bit about the psychology of social computing. From examining impression formation via computer mediated communication to studying the switch from an online relationship to off, Comm 245 has covered a great range. However, new technologies are born everyday. Thus, many studies that seem pertinent today may not be appropriate tomorrow. As video chat has become increasingly popular, perhaps studying the technology’s effects on impression/relationship development may provide interesting results. Furthermore, in light of the future, maybe studies on dating through virtual reality may also be applicable, as our society moves closer toward blending the online world with reality.
A few theories that will not be applicable in the future include Social Presence Theory, Reduced Social Context Cues and Social Information Processing. As we are currently seeing trends toward increased Internet dating (and modality switching actually working), these theories that predict less social presence, poorly developed and negative impression formation, and slower impression formation in CMC, respectively, will not hold in the future. Moreover, if these were even entirely true today, I do not believe there would be such an increase in Internet dating.
Certainly, we have learned quite a bit about the psychology of social computing. From examining impression formation via computer mediated communication to studying the switch from an online relationship to off, Comm 245 has covered a great range. However, new technologies are born everyday. Thus, many studies that seem pertinent today may not be appropriate tomorrow. As video chat has become increasingly popular, perhaps studying the technology’s effects on impression/relationship development may provide interesting results. Furthermore, in light of the future, maybe studies on dating through virtual reality may also be applicable, as our society moves closer toward blending the online world with reality.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Past, Present, and Future
Throughout the course we have learned about a number of theories that I believe are still very relevant. The class favorite, Hyperpersonal Model, will be a timeless theory. No matter what we know about the dangers of the CMC world and how it may warp our impressions of those we interact with on the internet, the human psyche will likely always draw us into exaggerated thoughts and feelings. In addition, the allowances of the internet (high deindividuation being one of them), will likely always be utilized at its full advantage. When the opportunity arises, people will likely choose to self-present themselves in the best light and look for common ground to connect with others around the world.
Another important topic covered in this class was Caplan's Theory on Problematic Internet Use. Considering the way internet is incorporated into almost everything our generation does, it put into perspective how much is too much internet usage and whether we are at risk of PIU. I'm sure it also relieved a few people to know that they may not be using the internet too much. Caplan's Theory seems to also contain many important elements to it since it deals with psychological issues linked to the internet. I feel the internet will always allow socially inept people to become comfortable somewhere in the world and has a high chance of taking over other aspects of their lives.
One thing that I think should be covered in future classes is how the internet is affecting us as students and as potential employees in the future. Are there any studies out there linking social skills to internet use? Is our generation becoming less able to communicate ideas face to face because we have become so used to text based environments? Also, it would be interesting to see if our multi-tasking skills may be better than previous generations due to our use of several different sources i.e. Youtube, listening to music, chatting, playing a video game, writing e-mail, all while writing a paper. These would be interesting topics to discuss for the future if there is any good literature out there exploring these roles.
Another important topic covered in this class was Caplan's Theory on Problematic Internet Use. Considering the way internet is incorporated into almost everything our generation does, it put into perspective how much is too much internet usage and whether we are at risk of PIU. I'm sure it also relieved a few people to know that they may not be using the internet too much. Caplan's Theory seems to also contain many important elements to it since it deals with psychological issues linked to the internet. I feel the internet will always allow socially inept people to become comfortable somewhere in the world and has a high chance of taking over other aspects of their lives.
One thing that I think should be covered in future classes is how the internet is affecting us as students and as potential employees in the future. Are there any studies out there linking social skills to internet use? Is our generation becoming less able to communicate ideas face to face because we have become so used to text based environments? Also, it would be interesting to see if our multi-tasking skills may be better than previous generations due to our use of several different sources i.e. Youtube, listening to music, chatting, playing a video game, writing e-mail, all while writing a paper. These would be interesting topics to discuss for the future if there is any good literature out there exploring these roles.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
11: A rather odd dating situation gone bad...
Aubrey, a 24-year-old woman from the Philippines, posted her experience with a boyfriend she first met online. She openly admits her dysfunction with dating. Her need to always be in a relationship affects her judgment, as evidenced by her blog post. Upon entering a chat room, Aubrey met Calvin. The two got to know each other online over a two-week period before the decided to meet. While their online interaction was brief, she felt she knew who Calvin was. Despite a few undesirable qualities, Calvin was a “nice guy” who was trying to turn his life around. After a bout with drug addition, Calvin was trying to get his life together. He too was lonely and looking for a relationship. In her post, Aubrey does not go into much detail about her expectations. In fact, it’s implied that she really didn’t have any, she came across as despite to find a new “boy” after her breakup a few days prior. After meeting Calvin, she quickly learned that his issues were far from resolved and his verbally abusive nature quickly revealed itself. However, Aubrey wanted to help Calvin and tolerated the abuse thinking that she could have a positive impact. Needless to say, the relationship didn’t last long. After a month and a half, Calvin broke up with her and threatened to kill her if she came near him again!
The developmental process of Aubrey’s outrageous story can be explained by Ramirez and Wang’s study on modality switching (the move from an online relationship to an offline relationship). The Expectancy Violation Theory (EVT) explains that when a relationship has little time to develop there are fewer expectations as a result of heightened uncertainty. Calvin’s violation of Aubrey’s opinion of him as a “good guy” trying to turn his life around had a less severe impact on the development of the offline relationship because the accumulated valence of past behavior was sort of neutralized. Aubrey knew that Calvin had issues, as did she with her need to be in a relationship, therefore, the valence, in Aubrey’s mind, was flighty and one that was not deeply invested in. Hence, the modality switch after interacting for only a short period online provided social information that was unexpected. This supports Ramirez and Wang’s first hypothesis.
The developmental process of Aubrey’s outrageous story can be explained by Ramirez and Wang’s study on modality switching (the move from an online relationship to an offline relationship). The Expectancy Violation Theory (EVT) explains that when a relationship has little time to develop there are fewer expectations as a result of heightened uncertainty. Calvin’s violation of Aubrey’s opinion of him as a “good guy” trying to turn his life around had a less severe impact on the development of the offline relationship because the accumulated valence of past behavior was sort of neutralized. Aubrey knew that Calvin had issues, as did she with her need to be in a relationship, therefore, the valence, in Aubrey’s mind, was flighty and one that was not deeply invested in. Hence, the modality switch after interacting for only a short period online provided social information that was unexpected. This supports Ramirez and Wang’s first hypothesis.
Assignment #11
Last semester, I lived off campus with four roommates. Wireless internet was included in our rent. Our landlord opted for the cheapest option possible, purchased the least expensive routers and installed wireless networks himself. That did not work out so well. We had multiple internet connection problems. In the middle of semester, we suddenly lost ability to go online although our signal was "strong." It was a very frustrating situation. Since the router was installed in my room, I got in charge of trying to fix this mess. That's when my relationship with netgear representative R started.
He was randomly assigned to me when I emailed technical support. Since our landlord and wireless provider were not able to help me with our connection problems, I resorted into contacting netgear, the manufacturer. He responded to my somewhat vague "I see signals, but I can't connect to any websites" with a simple question; "can you connect to websites using ethernet cord?" Why, yes I can. Afterwards I started receiving considerably longer instructions, such as how to do "ipconfig" and update our router. After a month of futile email correspondence, my landlord finally decided to pay for someone to take a look. And then wireless internet became alive and my short CMC with R was abruptly ended.
My interactions with R the computer support assistant mostly demonstrated hyperpersonal model. Although our interactions were limited to topics related to wireless network, I attributed various characteristics.He always had a suggestion and ended with courteous "Glad to be assisting you." Sure his responses were probably cut-and-paste cookie-cutter ones from the customer assistance manual. But he always had an answer and responded in a timely manner. It was fascinating. I assumed that he'd be a courteous and resourceful in real life. At the end, I didn't even consider the fact that he never actually solved the wireless problem.
He was randomly assigned to me when I emailed technical support. Since our landlord and wireless provider were not able to help me with our connection problems, I resorted into contacting netgear, the manufacturer. He responded to my somewhat vague "I see signals, but I can't connect to any websites" with a simple question; "can you connect to websites using ethernet cord?" Why, yes I can. Afterwards I started receiving considerably longer instructions, such as how to do "ipconfig" and update our router. After a month of futile email correspondence, my landlord finally decided to pay for someone to take a look. And then wireless internet became alive and my short CMC with R was abruptly ended.
My interactions with R the computer support assistant mostly demonstrated hyperpersonal model. Although our interactions were limited to topics related to wireless network, I attributed various characteristics.He always had a suggestion and ended with courteous "Glad to be assisting you." Sure his responses were probably cut-and-paste cookie-cutter ones from the customer assistance manual. But he always had an answer and responded in a timely manner. It was fascinating. I assumed that he'd be a courteous and resourceful in real life. At the end, I didn't even consider the fact that he never actually solved the wireless problem.
#11 Wow, you are... really different from how I pictured you!
Jarring! Disorienting! Disappointing! It sounds like the move from virtual to actual world always creates negative feelings. My friend's tale tells a different story.
In order to study abroad in any English-speaking country other than US, students must take the IELTS to prove their proficiency in English. Numerous forums have sprung online for people to exchange information regarding the test. My friend LJ was preparing to study in Britain. She joined a few forums, offering and receiving help from people in similar situations (i.e. send each other practice exams, etc). After a while, a few of them from the same city decided to meet. The results were great. They found the actual conversations in English were more helpful for their test preparation, and they got along quite well. This would seem to contradict the predictions of SIDE and hyperpersonal model, but I feel it's a combination of a few theories.
First of all, LJ's meeting was very task-oriented. Each person had a very specific goal: to improve their English. From the forum to the FtF meeting, this goal didn't change. Though they were interested in each other's life, social attractiveness wasn't their main purpose so they didn't expect much along that line. Secondly, Hyperpersonal model certainly plays a big role here. Where LJ lives, most people able to study abroad must be from a higher socioeconomic class. This is an uniting factor and a basis for great overattribution. LJ and her friends all assumed things about each other: good family background, etc. This made them think they were more alike than they really were. BUT these things were obviously not talked about in their meeting. They obviously didn't ask each other how much money their parents made. So there were basically no cues to give away their differences. Lastly, Uncertainty Reduction Theory also had a role. In the forum, you can hide rotten speaking skills if you are a good writer. But through their actual conversations, they realized their English skills were about the same. Which made them feel more alike and probably contributed to the overall success of the meeting.
To me, the relationship seems long-term (they had known each other for a few months when they met) so its positive outcome in FtF would contradict Ramiraz & Wang. But again, it's important that the meeting was task-oriented and people were probably more comfortable with each other because their goal in CMC and FtF remained the same.
In order to study abroad in any English-speaking country other than US, students must take the IELTS to prove their proficiency in English. Numerous forums have sprung online for people to exchange information regarding the test. My friend LJ was preparing to study in Britain. She joined a few forums, offering and receiving help from people in similar situations (i.e. send each other practice exams, etc). After a while, a few of them from the same city decided to meet. The results were great. They found the actual conversations in English were more helpful for their test preparation, and they got along quite well. This would seem to contradict the predictions of SIDE and hyperpersonal model, but I feel it's a combination of a few theories.
First of all, LJ's meeting was very task-oriented. Each person had a very specific goal: to improve their English. From the forum to the FtF meeting, this goal didn't change. Though they were interested in each other's life, social attractiveness wasn't their main purpose so they didn't expect much along that line. Secondly, Hyperpersonal model certainly plays a big role here. Where LJ lives, most people able to study abroad must be from a higher socioeconomic class. This is an uniting factor and a basis for great overattribution. LJ and her friends all assumed things about each other: good family background, etc. This made them think they were more alike than they really were. BUT these things were obviously not talked about in their meeting. They obviously didn't ask each other how much money their parents made. So there were basically no cues to give away their differences. Lastly, Uncertainty Reduction Theory also had a role. In the forum, you can hide rotten speaking skills if you are a good writer. But through their actual conversations, they realized their English skills were about the same. Which made them feel more alike and probably contributed to the overall success of the meeting.
To me, the relationship seems long-term (they had known each other for a few months when they met) so its positive outcome in FtF would contradict Ramiraz & Wang. But again, it's important that the meeting was task-oriented and people were probably more comfortable with each other because their goal in CMC and FtF remained the same.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)