The summer before I transferred to Cornell, I decided I wanted to see who else was transferring with me. I went straight to Facebook and I joined a group entitled “Cornell Transfers Fall 2005.” I was able to see who else was in my classes, in my dorm, shared interests, etc. and occasionally I would get a friend request from one person or another. In late July, I received an instant message from a guy that was my Cornell “facebook friend,” we will refer to this person as “Joe” for this assignment. Joe was also transferring to Cornell and he wanted to get to know some of our classmates through IMing before arriving on campus in August. Joe and I talked every so often before I came to Cornell, and by the time we had to go to school I felt that I really knew all about Joe’s life.
My interaction with Joe can be applied to McKenna’s relationship facilitation factors. McKenna five factors are identifiability, removal of gating features, interactional control, connecting to similar others and getting the goods. In my online communication with Joe, both interactional control and connecting to similar others apply to our situation. Interactional control is selective self presentation online. You can chose what you say and when you say things online. Interactional control applied to my situation with Joe because I was able to easily disclose only the information I wanted him to know on instant messenger. The only information he knew was from my facebook profile, which also was I was also selective in posting, not revealing too much information. Through instant messaging I was able to control the direction of the conversation and if he asked me a question I was uncertain how to answer, I could take my time in responding. In addition, he could not see my nonverbal cues such as facial expressions.
Connecting to similar others is also relevant to our situation. McKenna describes this concept as the “common ground principle,” it is easy to connect with similar others. The whole reason for our interaction was our similar situation of transferring to Cornell. If it was not for the social networking group “Cornell Transfers Fall 2005” we might not have even talked. As we began talking we realized we had even more in common, we both were politics majors at our other schools, we both went to schools in big cities and would be living in the same dorm. These commonalities fostered further conversation and the more Joe shared the easier it was for me to share information too.
Although once arriving at Cornell, Joe and I ended up making different friends, we still stay hello to one other on campus. It was also great to be able to come to Cornell knowing I had a friend, thanks to computer mediated communication.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Katelyn,
I enjoyed reading your post since I was able to relate to it, as I’m sure many of our other classmates were. Before entering a new category (“Cornell student”), it seems logical that one would be attracted to those who are already a part of this group or joining the group as well. Just like you and Joe spoke before you transferred to Cornell, I spoke to several people online before entering Cornell my freshman year. What I find interesting is that you said by the time you went to school you felt that you really knew all about Joe’s life. I believe this emphasizes the extent to which you and Joe began to self-disclose information to one another. I definitely agree that your situation relates to the common ground principle. It seems as though you perceived Joe to be similar to yourself since you were both politics majors at your other schools, went to school in big cities, and would be living in the same dorm at Cornell. I believe this supports the Law of Attraction. Due to the fact that individuals frequently know less about each other in CMC, the proportion of these mutual interests were greater than they may have been if you were speaking FtF--leading to more online attraction.
Hi, Katelyn, I also had a similar experience online before coming to Cornell, and I’m sure that tons of other students can also relate. The common ground factor had a lot to do with people I talked to before I came here. I not only joined the Cornell Class of 2010 group, but I also joined groups for my major and dorm, where I met even more people I had things in common with. I became friends with one girl in particular, because we were the same major, living in Balch, and only lived about half an hour away from each other. Unlike you and Joe, however, she’s still one of my best friends a year later, which just goes to show how real-world and online relationships are very different.
Katelyn, your story is very similar to my friend’s story who also transferred to Cornell. Unfortunately for her, it didn’t end well and those two people don’t even talk to each other anymore. I guess you are lucky. However, after reading your story, I saw that McKenna’s relationship facilitation factor identifiability was also at work. Identifiability will lead to more self disclosure, which will eventually lead to a better relationship development. In your case, you were able to self-disclose more to Joe and this facilitated your relationship. Also, by being friends on facebook probably gave you guys a lot to talk about. All in all, I really enjoyed reading your blog and I hope you and Joe can continue your friendship at Cornell.
Hi Katelyn. Your blog was very interesting. The summer after high school graduation, all my friends were making facebook accounts and making friends at their respective colleges. I, however, decided not to make a facebook account. I wanted to make friends the “old-fashion” way by coming to school and meeting people. However, once college got nearer and nearer my friends from high school were talking to their facebook friends not only on facebook but on the phone as well. I truly regretted, at that point, not making a facebook account and meeting new friends before going college. Like what you did before transferring to Cornell, my high school friends were able to connect to similar others using facebook. I was so nervous going to college knowing everyone had all these facebook friends and I did not. In conclusion, facebook is a form of computer-mediated communication that people can use to make friends at college before starting the school year.
Hey Katelyn, so let me sound like a broken record and say that we've all been there! What I really found different from your experience and mine was that you connected through interactional control and connecting to similar others. Thinking back to my experience, I just thought he was cute and therefore responded to his message. However, I think that what CMC provided by finding someone you were similar with and your points about how you got to pick and choose what you wanted to say shows how important facebook has become in our relationships with others. As we are joining groups and friending new people and learning about their interests, our social network is growing at the cost of us becoming stalkers. Moreover, I am curious as to what theories do you think were factors in why you both made different friends at school. Do you think that maybe the same ideas including proximity (Wallace Attraction Factors) that are supposed to bring people together can also set them apart?
Hey Katelyn! I really enjoyed your post and thought that you applied McKenna's relationship facilitation factors accurately. I also liked how relatable your post was.
Your explanation of interactional control was great. I think we often forget of the luxuries that CMC affords us, such as giving some time to form responses and choose what that response entails.
I wonder what you think played a bigger role in the self-disclosure that occurred within your communication with John. Do you think it was because you had so much in common that you felt at ease to discuss other topics, or that the medium of instant messaging afforded a disinhibition effect that allowed you to share more?
Post a Comment