Before the lecture about media selection, I never realized how many decisions I had to make daily regarding selective media. For example, I was trying to let my brother know I was coming home next weekend. I was deciding if it was better to call him on the phone or simply IM him. It didn’t take me long to decide which medium to choose. I had a problem set due the next day, and I had to get up at 7:30am for a research meeting. Since it was already 2 a.m., my decision occurred almost instantaneously. Obviously, I decided to IM him.
This example of IMing versus calling my brother supports the Media Richness Theory. I chose to use a lean media for less equivocal tasks (efficiency) because I simply wanted him to know I was coming home. I knew if we were to talk on the phone, I would be asking him how work was and he would ask me how school was. From experience, I knew I was going to be on the phone with him for at least 30 minutes. On the other hand, by using instant messaging, I knew that he would respond quickly, as if we had a phone conversation, but without having to talk about school and work, supporting the Media Richness Theory about the availability of feedback (richness). I was simply looking to have a quick and efficient conversation and succeeded in doing so.
In a second instance, I was trying to figure out what was the best way to catch up with one of my friends from another university. We decided to have a videoconference because it allows FtF and CMC interaction simultaneously. I wanted to choose a medium that was rich for more equivocal tasks and allowed me to gain as much information from my friend as possible during our videoconference. The idea of using videoconferencing as the selected medium was a good choice because of the availability of instant feedback, the availability of multiple cues such as verbal and visual cues like body language, and message personalization. I felt as though we were sitting in a cafe talking to each other, although in reality, she's hundreds of miles away. Although videoconferencing isn’t exactly a FtF interaction, it includes many of the cues of the FtF interaction that CMC simply doesn’t, such as vocal and nonverbal cues. Videoconferencing serves as a very rich medium that brings a fusion of FtF and CMC together into one medium, which again supports the ideas of the media richness theory.
Comments:
http://comm245red.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-3-to-text-or-to-call-that-is.html
http://comm245red.blogspot.com/2007/09/3-for-efficiencys-sake.html
2 comments:
Selina, interesting post! I think your thought process about instant messaging or calling your brother clearly signified the Media Richness Theory. I often will IM friends from home instead of call if I know I am in a rush, similar to your situation. Sometimes I wonder what happened before IMing was invented!
Also your use of videoconferencing is most certainly a rich medium. Videoconferencing is a medium I usually do not think to use but your are correct that it is the closest to FTF with you ability to recognize nonverbal cues. I wonder what O’Sullivan would say about videoconferencing in regards to locus and valence.
Nice post, Selina! I really thought you came up with some interesting examples of media selection. Maybe next time though you could mention another theory (in these case O'Sullivan's) and discuss why it would not apply to the situation.
I completely agree with your choice to instant message your brother. IMing is definitely the go-to media for a quick question at a late time, and you're right, calling someone usually entails some time for playing catch-up with your communication partner.
I also really liked that fact that you used videoconferencing with your friend at another school. This is definitely the richest medium available for friends in different places, so I'm sure you enjoyed the cues that you wouldn't have received with a phone call or facebook. Great job!
Post a Comment