I had a quasi-long-distance relationship for about two and a half years in high school, as my girlfriend for that time lived a 30-minute drive away in a different area code. The drive meant I could only visit her on weekends, if I was lucky, and phone calls were completely out of the question thanks to my family’s lack of a long distance plan. As a result, virtually all of our interaction that didn’t involve watching television together was conducted over AIM.
At first, this felt weird to me, but after a couple of months, I began to prefer talking on AIM over having the same conversation on a rare phone call. This preference arose for two reasons. One, that I could hold a conversation while doing other stuff, whether it was homework or staring off into space while playing FreeCell, and two, that I could also have a conversation even if I wasn’t really in the mood to talk to her. McKenna’s (2007) theory contains two aspects that apply to me. First, the idea of the removal of gating features facilitates relationship formation and maintenance applies here, but not strictly in the sense we discussed in lecture. We’ve all heard that one of the hardest parts of a truly serious relationship is getting used to being around the same person day and night. I think that the distance of our relationship, combined with our ability to talk casually and not always in person, made for much less pressure and for more interesting conversations as a result.
The other factor of McKenna that applies here is obviously the idea of interactional control. As I’ve already mentioned, I grew to love the fact that I could play a game or watch a movie and pretend to be wildly interested in what she had to say about what the new girl in school wore to class that day. By keeping the conversations in the AIM environment, I was able to control the situations that arose in a strictly text-based medium. I am sure that there were days when she was behaving the same way on her end. I believe that because we were both able to relax and interact more casually, which ultimately probably helped our relationship last as long as it did, a sure sign of relationship maintenance being facilitated by the chosen means of communication.
http://comm245red.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-5-long-distance-friendships.html
http://comm245red.blogspot.com/2007/09/5-option-1-long-distance-marriageon.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Spencer,
I would tie theory more into your next post. Sounds like you mentioned the theory and then you went on to describe more of your relationship without really expanding on the application of the theory. Maybe you can expand more on the details of the theory. For example, specifically what gating features? The professor reiterated this a couple of times, but I think it helps to explain the points of the theory before applying it. It'll seem less ambiguous that way.
This post makes me wonder how romantic relationships will evolve with emerging technologies. AIM is a relatively new way for a romantic relationship to be maintained. If you look at it objectively, clearly such an interaction takes far less energy than almost any other means of communication. It sounds like AIM contributed to the longevity of the relationship between you and your girlfriend. Did the choice of communication bring you closer or further apart than the phone would have?
I can definitely see how McKenna's factor of Interaction Control comes into play here. I'm glad that apparently this factor was a benefit to both of you, that each of you could relax with a more casual conversation. Do you think that Wallace's Disinhibition effects played a role? My experience is that because of the relaxed nature of AIM in a romantic relationship, both parties tend to be a bit more forthcoming. I'd be interested in a more in-depth analysis of your relationship as it ties to the theoretical factors.
Post a Comment