I had a hand to play in helping a relationship leave the CMC world into the FtF world. My friend, whom we shall call Jane, met my other friend, whom we shall call James, through instant messaging before meeting in real life. When Jane was sitting at my computer, I received an instant message from James. Jane thought she would be funny and started talking to James while I was distracted with other things. I returned to my computer to discover that I was now in a homosexual relationship with James. I told Jane to talk to him under her own identity. Afterwards, she Facebooked him and proceeded to communicate with him over her own instant messaging name. Eventually, over the summer break, I organized a get together for James and Jane. When they met, it seemed like a positive experience.
The uncertainty reduction theory predicted this outcome. According to the theory, more information prior to meeting the person FtF leads to more positive outcomes. James and Jane both had access to each other's information through Facebook. They saw their common friends, tagged pictures, and interests. This led to the establishment of common ground and expectations prior to meeting FtF. SIDE theory did not play a role on this occasion due to the lack of desire to keep individualizing characteristics hidden. Both Jane and James put up more personal (less group related) information on their Facebook profiles, maintaining openness in their individual images. The Hyperpersonal model also did not affect the transition of the relationship from online to real life. Since I knew both James and Jane, I corrected any exaggerated images one party might perceive of the other. For example, when Jane noted that James appeared tall in his pics, I explained that he was in fact relatively short. By moderating their impressions, the exaggerated preconception due to online interaction was avoided.
When switching from CMC to FtF, the expectations were not violated. This is contrary to Ramirez and Wang's proposal that the transition may cause unmet expectations that result in a negative outcome. The time between meeting FtF and meeting in CMC was about 7 months, a considerably long term relationship. According to Ramirez and Wang, this long term relationship would have led to a more negative outcome, but James and Jane both had a positive outcome.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Henry, interesting post. I think you touched on a very important and common factor in relationships, that is especially important to those who go through a modality switch. The mutual friend is a key factor in the development of non-FtF relationships. So many variables can effect what role that middle man plays, though. For instance, how close each person is to the mutual friend, who the mutual friend is closer to, and how honest and trustworthy the person is all have an impact. This third person is also important because, as we have talked about in class, people tend to trust what others say about a person more than what the individual says about him or herself. Therefore, you bring up a very interesting and significant point. Future studies should test the effect of a mutual friend on modality switching. This would be fascinating and informative.
Henry—I think you did a great job relating communication theory to this modality switch scenario. The fact that you acted as the middle man places an interesting twist on the traditional CMC to face-to-face transition. I agree that Uncertainty Reduction Theory is supported by this interaction since this theory predicts a positive outcome as a result of leaving virtuality. I think your explanation of why the Hyperpersonal Model did not influence the transition of the relationship was particularly interesting. The role you played in their relationship cleared up exaggerated perceptions that Jane and James may have formed of one another (canceling out over-attribution) and also allowed them to learn more about each other as opposed to being limited to what they chose to share with one another online (counteracting selective self-representation).
Henry,
Your story sounds very familiar in that I think a lot of people tend to make relationships both in a romantic sense as well as purely just friends through instances such as these. I definitely agree with you in that the uncertainty reduction theory applied in your friends' case.
It was an interesting twist you brought into play that you were the mediator for your friends, dispelling any miscommunication and misinterpreted impressions of one another through CMC. I think that also plays an interesting factor in the relationship between your two friends that these theories never tested or might have considered. Great job on your last post!
Post a Comment