During my senior year of high school, I grew quite close to a girl from school. Surprisingly, we met in an online environment, then moved to face-to-face interaction. We decided to try to keep the relationship going in college and see how well a long distance relationship worked out. We chatted daily quite a bit through computer mediated communication, as well as phones. I find that it is quite easy to carry on a conversation online for extended periods of time. It allowed for more self-disclosure than would probably have taken place in an FtF situation, and I didn’t feel like our lives were that far separated thanks to the wonders of modern communication.
Initially, I might attribute our relationship to McKenna’s “Stranger on the Train” effect. This states that because of the level of anonymity between us, it was easier for self-disclosure to take place, especially through CMC. Granted we went to the same high school, we did not meet FtF until the first few interactions via CMC. However, as we grew to know each other, and even on into college, the amount of self-disclosure that was taking place between us every day was phenomenal. Our relationship certainly supports McKenna’s relationship facilitation factor of indentifiability. McKenna states that the more identifiable someone is, the higher the chance of self-disclosure through CMC. He also states that the more anonymous someone is, the higher the chance of self-disclosure through CMC. In this case both have proven true.
After our initial meetings, we had to remove the “gating features” in our relationship. McKenna describes gating features as physical attractiveness, social anxiety, master status cues, etc… We both happened to be somewhat shy at the time, which might account for why we met first in a CMC environment. Overcoming this social anxiety, as well as finally seeing whether or not we might be physically attracted to one another allowed us to move forward in the relationship. It was much easier to take this step in removing gates since we were already familiar with the other person’s personality and character. Thanks to starting our relationship in an anonymous setting, we had moved past personality similarities before approaching physical appearance. Since we were already attracted to each other, overcoming these gates was simple.
Overall, I found that McKenna’s relationship facilitation factors held true in this case. Our relationship was definitely something I will cherish for the rest of my life. However, now that I’ve written this, I believe I will find it hard to not analyze future relationships according to the models we have been learning in this class.
4 comments:
Jeffrey, your long distance relationship experience had good applications of McKenna’s Facilitation Factors. I too am shy and I find that the anonymity in CMC helps remove the gate of social anxiety when first meeting people because it is not only much easier to interact and talk with them without having to worry about nonverbal cues, but I also feel like I have more control with the direction of the conversation (i.e. - O’Sullivan Model). Do you think that in disclosing more to your girlfriend that you were able to find more common ground?
I was impressed by the successful transfer of your relationship from CMC to FtF. Some people find it difficult because they may feel like the other party acts differently online than they do in person.
(By the way, I also find myself being more analytical about how I interact with people online. It must be the effects of this class.)
Jeffrey-
I found it very fascinating that you first met the girl online when she went to your high school. You must have gone to a big high school! I also thought it was very interesting that even after meeting her FtF, you used mediated communication more than the phone. However, I do agree that chatting in a lean medium such as instant messenger makes it easier to self-disclose because you can’t see the reaction of the other person since nonverbal cues are not available. Even some verbal cues are non-existent because as long as there aren’t video or voice applications with CMC interaction, a person has time to think about how they would like to respond to the information you present them.
Depending on how developed your relationship was before you left for college, I don’t know if I agree that your experience matches both of McKenna’s relationship facilitation factors of identifiablity. I think that it more closely follows the “Stranger in a Crowd Effect” because you two had already met in person before the CMC self-disclosure increased. By the time you had reached the “Stranger on the Train Effect,” your identities were pretty well known, and thus not very anonymous.
I was glad to hear that not only did the relationship work out through self-disclosure, but also after the removal of gating features. Long-distance relationships are very difficult so I commend you for your success!
Hey Jeffrey. I think that your blog successfully illustrates many of the factors that we have discussed relating to interpersonal relationships in mediated settings. Specifically, I think that you appropriately relate McKenna’s facilitation factors to your own personal experience. I am impressed that you were able to successfully transfer a relationship dependent on mediated communication, to one more predominantly face-to-face. I agree with you that your willingness to self-disclose is representative of McKenna’s “Stranger on the Train Effect,” which states that anonymity leads to self-disclosure. It appears that you benefited from interacting without the difficulties that arise from “gating features,” such as physical attractiveness and master cues. Ultimately, I appreciate that you were able to bypass these gating features, upon meeting your girlfriend in a face-to-face interaction, because you were already attracted to each other from your mediated interactions.
Jeffrey, that’s rough that you’re going to analyze future relationships based on the models we have been learning in class. I think I’m in the same boat, and I think it’s going to lead to a lot of pointless over thinking on our part. I can see why communicating online would be so helpful, seeing as how you guys hadn’t met face to face it helped keep some of that anonymity. I bet your conversations were a lot looser since you had time to work out a response and didn’t have to worry about those body language and facial cues. I think there is definitely some “Stranger on a Train” effect there since you guys met online, even though you went to the same high school. I’m just curious, but how’d that work out? Friend of a friend or what? Either way since that level of anonymity was there you had no problem disclosing information. You’re only real concern would have to be bumping into them in school, but since you didn’t know what you looked like it didn’t matter.
Post a Comment