The internet space I chose to enter was a chatroom entitled college. I figured college was the best choice considering it was basic and applied to my true age. The last time I was in a chatroom was in Middle School when AOL was the cool new craze. I was somewhat nervous entering an unknown space where I knew I would not be talking to any of my friends/acquaintances. In order to log in, I first need to create a screename. I decided to go with the basic name of Kate1001 in order to remain as unknown as possible.
I decided to observe a user with the name of Giants72. I did not want to choose a person with a basic name because I assumed that they would be less likely to share as much information considering their name alone tells little about themselves. I decided to interact with Giants72 right away. I addressed this person in the chat with Giants72, what is your name? Although he would not reveal his name, nor his college he did share he was from the NYC area, a male age 19 and was in fact attending college in the NYC. He would not reveal which school he attended. Our conversation consisted mainly of me asking specific questions such as “What do you do for fun?, “How is school?” He always responded to my questions and in time began asking me the same questions as well. It seemed that as I was more open about sharing info, he too began to communicate more easily. Considering the 5 Personality traits, I would label Giants72 as a 6 on a scale of 1-10 for openness. Although he would not reveal his name or college, he did share he enjoyed running, was trying out for the crew team, majoring in some form of business. I would rate him an 8 on agreeableness. He seemed to be very friendly and also inquisitive about my interests as well. He does not seem to be very extraverted, I would rate him a 3/10. When I asked, what do you do for fun? He responded watch TV. I then asked do you go out often in the city with friends and he replied, no I would rather chill here. Neuroticism and Conscientiousness were more difficult to tell in our brief conversation. Maybe if I had more time with Giants72, I would be able to develop a better impression in regards to these traits.
My impression of Giants72 most definitely could be applied to our class discussion. I found it difficult at first to form an impression of Giants72 because I wondered often about his non verbal cues. When he made a comment, I would think, “Is he lying?” “Is he sarcastic?” Face to face it is much easier to distinguish the meaning of a person’s comments due to non verbal cues. Regardless, I would say my impression of Giants72 can by classified under the hyperpersonal model. I found out a decent amount of information about Giants over time. The information I did not find out, I began to stereotype in my mind. I thought to myself, “He must be physically fit if he is trying out for crew?” and “He must be smart if he goes to school in NY, probably NYU or Columbia.” Both of these assumptions could turn out to be completely untrue but based on the information giants provided it was the assumption I made about him.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Katelyn,
I found it interesting that you would choose the name Kate1001 in order to remain as unknown as possible. Even with just using a name with Kate, I would think the other user might be able to make overattributions based on his own experience with Kate's. It's even more interesting that you began by querying Giants72 for his name instead of information like age, sex, and gender. According to our class discussions, these are the first things we attempt to find out about a person we first meet. It surprised me that they were your second priority when addressing him.
As far as your writing is concerned, it is fine. I would try to be more clear. Maybe I'm just misinterpreting, but I was really confused when you said you did not want to choose a person with a basic name. I don't really know what you meant by "basic name."
Hey Katelyn. After reading your blog, I feel that you had a very successful online chatting experience. I am surprised that you managed to engage in a genuine conversation because in my online experience I was confronted only with sex-obsessed, lewd individuals. Regardless, I am not sure if I understand your reasoning in choosing to interact with Giants72. Though you may be confident that the person to whom you’re speaking is a Giants fan, or a New York City native, I find it very strange that this person ultimately did not divulge his identity. Though you make many assumptions about Giants72, such as that he is athletic, and intelligent because he attends a New York City college, I am not sure if these assumptions are well founded. In making assumptions about Giants72, I would doubt his genuinity due to the fact that he did not reveal his name and college. Furthermore, though you assume he goes to NYU or Columbia, I would assume that a student at NYU or Columbia would be more than willing to reveal the fact that he goes to either of these prestigious institutions. Ultimately, I disagree with you that your impressions of Giants72 support the Hyperpersonal model. Though you claim to have received a “decent amount of information,” from Giants72, which is consistent with the Hyperpersonal model, you did not form the intense impression that is required of the Hyperpersonal model. Alternatively, I feel that your impressions support the Cues-Filtered-Out Social Presence Theory, which claims that a computer-mediated-communication will lead to reduced social presence and an impoverished impression formation. Ultimately, according to the CFO perspective, the lack of nonverbal cues should lead to a neutral, underdeveloped impression formation. This hypothesis appears to be more consistent with your impression formation than that of the Hyperpersonal model.
I'm interested in the way that you rated him/her a 6 when it came to openness. There is a very fundamental question when it comes to this point, and that's asking what information is critical to raising that rating for openness. But the fact that s/he would indicate that s/he is into athletics and other things of that nature (and is probably interested in observing professional sports as well, given his/her screenname) conveys a lot to me. And I think that these concepts are probably more personal than simple names.
Sure, this person isn't going to give his/her name. But honestly, what does it matter whether it's Rick, Joe, Bob or Pussy Cat? Maybe it could be an indication of his/her race or gender or something like that. But it doesn't tell you very much about the person on a more fundamental level. What I mean is that you can probably tell a lot more about a person who tells you about his/her interests rather than just a name. A name is something given to you by your parents - but the things you watch and are involved in can serve as a great indicator of your mentality, commitment and priorities.
So maybe this person wasn't willing to give a name. The fact that s/he didn't want to be very open always lingers, but in essence, is a name something we can really use to tell about ourselves to someone else? Probably not.
Post a Comment