This semester I met a guy in one of my classes while trying to form a group for our final project. I had one person in my group already and just needed one more person. I got emails from a couple of dudes who still needed a partner for the project but I chose this one dude in particular because he was senior computer science major and the project was a CS project. I corresponded with him very briefly over the course of two days and then we met as a group to discuss the project. I must admit that I was slightly disappointed when I met him. The determining factor for me choosing him to be in my group was that he said he was a senior CS major. A former CS major myself, I know the rigorous workload that professors demand of their CS students. I figured that our project would be a piece of cake for him, a break from his real CS work. I thought he would be a “super-programmer”, someone we could just throw heavy problems at and who would be able to solve them with no problem. After or initial meeting and following work sessions, I realized that he was no more capable to write code and problem solve than anyone else in the group.
I think my reaction could best be described by SIDE. Even though I had never met him, I associated him with the highly intelligent CS majors I have met in the past. This made me build him up to be some sort of programming genius before I met him. I over attributed him as a overly intelligent guy since the only thing I knew about him was that he belonged to that group of smart CS majors.
This contradicts the long-term vs. short-term factor discussed in the Ramirez & Wang paper. The paper predicted that with a short time in CMC only a few expectations could be made so the corresponding FTF would be about “filling in the blanks”, while a long time in CMC would allow for many expectations to be made the corresponding FTF would be disappointing since many of the expectation would probably not be met. The only characteristic that interested me was his programming skills and when they weren’t above average I was disappointed. The theory did not take into account that in certain contexts only a few characteristics would be of importance and even the few expectations that were made could lead to a negative experience.
4 comments:
Mike,
I can definitely relate to your stresses with choosing good and capable group members to work with on projects. I am actually a former engineer myself and sympathize with your troubles with coding. I definitely think you took the few cues you knew from conversing with this guy from emails and such and generalized significantly. I think in this case you are guilty of over attribution from the fact that this guy is a CS major.
As you said, because of this generalization from such few cues about this guy, your leaving virtuality was negative when you encountered this guy in group meetings.
I agree with you that with the SIDE theory, meeting someone FtF can be a negative experience whether or not the relationship was long-term. I think your experience also fits with the hyperpersonal model, however. You only knew a few characteristics about this guy, but you had already formed a really strong impression of him before you met based on these. This can also result in a negative experience when leaving virtuality, no matter how long you two had conversed.
Mike,
I can sympathize, and I agree that your situation contradicts Ramirez and Wang's ideas. Since him being a CS major was the only characteristic you cared about, when that expectation wasn't met it threw their theory out the window. I agree that they don't take into account that some characteristics matter more than others in certain situations.
Hey Mike! I really liked your post and thought you applied Ramirez and Wang's study effectively. I've had similar negative experiences in group projects with seniors. I guess we should take into account that they may have a case of senioritis. I agree with Anne with her application of the hyperpersonal model in this situation. Not only did you group this student with other CS majors, you associated him with an elevated expertise and exaggerated knowledge. Here's hoping your project turned out alright!
Post a Comment