virtual relationships

• reduced cues theory:

  • cmc less effective than ftf - lack of cues to emotional state that would be in ftf e.g tone + facial expressions
  • lack leads to deindividuation (no sense of identity) + creates dishibition in relating to others
  • more likely to be aggressive - reluctance to self disclose + start relationship
• hyperpersonal model (walther):

  • cmc develops quickly as self disclosure more intimate + quick, higher level of excitement no trust - boom + bust phenomenon
  • sender of message more likely to manipulate image, present in more idealised way - selective self preservation
  • bargh et al - importance of anonymity - not aware of identity, not accountable for behaviour, disclose more - strangers on a train
• absence of gating (mckenna + bargh):

  • gate = anything that can get in way of development e.g appearance + social anxiety
  • ftf to gated, advantage of cmc, progression can be faster
  • absence makes people refocus on disclosure not distractions - more interest online + can create person they want to be
• EVALUATION: importance of internet relationships

  • rosenfield + thomas - 4000 us adults, more likely to be in relationship with internet - 72% who had internet had partner, 36%
  • even when controlling variables e.g sexuality, age those with internet 2x more likely to have relationship
  • virtual environment helps people establish + maintain relationship
• EVALUATION: lack of support for reduced cues

  • walther + tidwell - people online use different cues e.g style - taking time to respond can be seen as intimate act
  • emojis used as substitutes for facial expressions/tone
  • cmc can be just as personal as ftf - possible to express emotions
• EVALUATION: support for absence of gating

  • mckenna + bargh -lonely anxious people were able to express themselves in cmc
  • 70% survived >2 years - higher than those formed in real life
  • power of cmc to overcome obstacles