During the spring semester of my freshman year, I began pledging for a sorority. Little did I know that I would meet a sorority sister who would become one of my best friends. The development of our relationship had a slow start. I knew who she was but when I saw her in person, I didn’t talk to her much. Yet, one day when she IMed me, we started to talk about random things and our conversation lasted for over 2 hours. I was shocked that I could chat so long with her online, especially since we didn't talk much prior to talking through instant messaging. I didn't realize how easy it was to self-disclose online versus FtF interaction. In the weeks that followed, we continually talked online and eventually we didn't feel the awkwardness we felt when we talked FtF.
Our IM conversations support McKenna’s relationship facilitation factor about identifiability where the more you identify with someone, the closer you become. The basic idea of the “Stranger on the Train” effect is that you are anonymous, which leads to increased self-disclosure, which then leads to relationship development. It is much easier to self-disclose online because it increases private self-awareness (think about your own thoughts) and also decreases public self-awareness (think about how others think of you). Although, I did not talk to her much when I first met her in person, we had a lot to talk about online. I felt more comfortable to self-disclose personal information and beliefs. It was a simple form of exchange where I disclosed something about myself and then she would disclose something about herself. We talked about interests and realized we shared similar tastes in music and movies. We talked about our families and found that we both were very family-oriented. These similarities in our tastes and beliefs lead to McKenna’s relationship factor, connecting to similar others, which supports the common ground principle. The idea is that it’s easy to identify with similar interests and it allows people to connect across space and time. It makes sense because if two people share interests they have more to talk about than two people who have totally different interests and beliefs.
When my friend and I met, my friend was already a senior about to graduate, so our relationship developed into a long distance friendship. At first, we communicated via computer-mediated communication and through the phone. Since I spend a lot of time online, we found it convenient to talk online rather than on the phone. However, CMC has its setbacks such as lacking verbal and visual cues so we decided to get webcams and now we use Skype to talk to each other at least once a week to catch up on each other’s lives. Using videoconferencing through Skype has allowed us to see and verbally talk to each other. This supports Wallace’s attraction factor, proximity. Using the webcam to communicate rather than just AIM or on the phone has allowed us to feel like we are physically close to one another. Online familiarity flows from intersection frequency where the more we can see each other through videoconferencing, chat through instant messaging, and talk on the phone, the closer we feel like our friendship is being maintained.
The long distance friendship my friend and I share supports McKenna’s relationship facilitation factors, identifiability and connecting to similar others, and Wallace’s attraction factor, proximity.
http://comm245red.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-5-option-2-will-you-marry-me.html
http://comm245red.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-5-option-2-is-this-man.html
2 comments:
Selina,
I liked your post because I felt like I could really relate to it. I understand that it is sometimes difficult to form frienships with someone whom you look up to so much. Talking online, therefore, enables you to really get to know each other without the difficulties of face to face communication.
I agree with the theories you chose to support your relationship formation, and I like that you decided to relate to both Wallace and McKenna. I think you did a great job explaining the "stranger on the Train" effect and relating that to your conversations online.
In addition, I think you could have also incorporated McKenna's relationship facilitation factor "Interactional Control," which discusses selective self-presentation and choosing mediums. This relates to the fact that you chose to get to know this girl over internet conversations and phone calls instead of through face to face communication.
Hi Selina,
First of all, I thought this was a really good post with some interesting aspects. I agree with Jenny that you did a good job of explaining and integrating theory into your experience in CMC communication. What really stood out to me, though, was the progression of media richness that resulted from your original IM conversations. At first in person, the two of you were “awkward,” but then began instant messaging online. Your increased self-disclosure online led to more feelings of closeness, which led to comfortable chats in person, but also in new, richer forms of CMC. By now adding video chat to your instant messaging, you demonstrate how you formed a much closer bond with your sorority sister through CMC. After opening up in a fairly poor medium, you now feel perfectly comfortable in a richer setting, proof positive that CMC can and does facilitate relationship formation.
Post a Comment