Virtual relationships

• Virtual relationships and social media

  There is no doubt that the internet has revolutionised the way in which we communicate, and it has been argued, it has altered the way in which relationships are carried out. 

  Prior to the age of internet communication, the only way to communicate was face to face, phone or letters.
• Paralanguage - important?

  When we speak face to face with someone, it is not just our words which communicate our meaning. 

  Non-verbal paralanguage may be more important than the words themselves for example body posture, eye gaze may express liking even if the verbal communication does not. 

  On the phone, there are still paralanguage signals such as pauses and tone of voice which can communicate intention. 

  However, all non-verbal communication is lost on the internet; meaning is dependent only upon words and nothing else.
• More self-disclosure

  • Anonymity 
  • They don’t know your friends
  • Time to think about what to say
  • Less embarrassment
  • Sexting
• Less self-disclosure

  • More editing
  • Worry of blackmailing, trolling, catfishing
• Self disclosure in virtual relationships

  Psychologists have long known that self-disclosure is an important feature of Face to Face (FtF) relationships in the offline world. In recent years psychologists have turned their attention to its role in relationships rooted in social media.

  How does self-disclosure feature in Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) relationships?

  There are two major and contrasting theories;

  1. Reduced Cues Theory

  2. The Hyperpersonal Model
• Reduced Cues Theory 

  Sproull and Kiesler (1986) 

  Self Disclosure is lower
• The Hyperpersonal model Walther (1996)

  Self Disclosure is higher
• AO1 - Reduced cues theory

  Sproull and Kiesler (1986)

  CMC (Computed Mediated Communication) relationships are less effective than FtF ones because they lack many of the cues we normally depend on in FtF interactions. These include non-verbal cues such as our physical appearance. CMC particularly lack cues to our emotional state, such as our facial expressions and tone of voice. 

  Without some of these cues this can lead to deindividuation because it reduces people’s sense of individual identity, which in turn then encourages disinhibition in relating to others.
• AO1 - Reduced cues theory

  Virtual relationships are therefore more likely to involve blunt and even aggressive communication. 

  The upshot of this is a reluctance to disclose and reveal any meaning information about yourself.

  You are unlikely to want to initiate a relationship with someone who is so impersonal, or reveal your innermost feelings to them.
• AO1 - The hyperpersonal model

  Walther (1996, 2011) 

  Online relationships can be more personal and involve greater disclosure that FtF ones. This is because on CMC, relationships can develop quickly as disclosure happens earlier, and once established they are more intense and intimate.

  In addition to this it also means that they can end more quickly because of the high excitement level of interactions is not matched by the level of trust between the relationship partners.
• AO1 - The hyperpersonal model

  Cooper and Sportolari (1997) called this the boom and bust phenomenon.

  According to the hyperpersonal model, a key feature of self-disclosure in virtual relationships is that the sender of a message has more time to manipulate their online image than they would in an FtF situation. 

  Walther calls this selective self-presentation.

  People online have more control over what they disclose and what cues to send. This means it’s much easier to manipulate self-disclosure to promote intimacy in CMC relationships, by self-presenting in a positive and idealised way.
• AO1 - The hyperpersonal model

  Another aspect of CMC that promotes self-disclosure and makes relationships hyperpersonal is anonymity. 

  Bargh (2002) points out that of this is rather like the strangers on the train effect in FtF relationships.  

  When you’re aware that other people do not know your identity, you feel less accountable for your actions and behaviour. So you may well disclose more about yourself to a stranger than to even your most intimate partner.
• Reduced Cues Theory Sproull and Kiesler (1986)

  • Cues such as physical appearance or cues to our emotional state are lacking in CMC
  • This can lead to deindividuation a person losing their identify and acting in a way they wouldn’t normally (disinhibition)
  • So often CMC involves aggressive and blunt communication with leads to a reluctance in self disclosure
• The Hyperpersonal model. 

  Walther (1996)

  • CMC relationships can be more personal and have greater self disclosure than FtF
  • CMC relationships can develop very quickly as self disclosure happens earlier so they become more intense and intimate
  • They can also end quicker because the underlying trust and knowledge of the other person is lacking
• AO1 - Absence of gating in virtual relationships

  FtF interaction is said to be gated because it involves many features that can interfere with the early development of a relationship.

  Examples of these gates can include physical unattractiveness, a stammer, social anxiety, age, physical disability, shyness
• AO1 - Absence of gating in virtual relationships

  McKenna and Bargh (1999) 

  The huge advantage of CMC is the absence of gating. This means that the relationship can develop to a point where self-disclosure becomes more frequent and deeper. 

  This absence of gating allows an online relationship to ‘get off the ground’ in a way that is less likely to happen in an FtF situation.

  Absence of gating works by refocusing attention on self-disclosure and away from one might be considered superficial and distracting features. More interested in what you tell me rather than what you look and sound like.
• AO1 - Absence of gating in virtual relationships

  The gates otherwise present in FtF communication can remain hidden and this in turn allows self disclosure and intimacy to develop

  Then the gate may be revealed but because of the self disclosure it doesn’t matter as much now
• AO1 - Absence of gating in virtual relationships

  A concern though, absence of gating also means that people are free to create online identities that they could never manage FtF. 

  A man can become a woman, an introvert can become an extrovert.

  Perhaps the ultimate expression of this ungated existence is Second Life, where anyone can create any kind of avatar to represent themselves in a virtual reality.
• AO3 - Lack of research support for reduced cues theory

  The theory is wrong to suggest that nonverbal cues are entirely missing from CMC. They are different rather than absent.

  Walther and Tidwell (1995):

  People in online interaction use other cues such as the style and the timing of the message. 

  There are subtle difference which can be used in CMC that are similar to FtF relationships. Acrostics such LOL, emoticons and emojis, are used as effective substitutes for facial expressions, tone of voice, portraying dislike and illness to name but a few.
• What does the hyperpersonal model predict about self-disclosure in CMC?

  It predicts hyper honest and hyper dishonest self-disclosure
• What did Whitty and Joinson (2009) find in their research?

  They found evidence supporting the hyperpersonal model
• How do online discussions differ from face-to-face (FtF) meetings according to the study?

  Online discussions involve direct and intimate questions
• Why are certain questions considered inappropriate in FtF meetings?

  They are seen as 'going too far'
• What type of conversation is typical in face-to-face discussions?

  Small talk
• How do people respond to personal questions in online discussions?

  They answer directly and to the point
• AO3 - Support for the absence of gating

  McKenna and Bargh (2000) looked at CMC use by lonely and socially anxious people. 

  Findings: 

  • Such people were to express their ‘true selves’ more online than in FtF situations.
  • Of the romantic relationships that initially formed online, 70% survived more than 2 years.
  • This is a higher proportion than for relationships formed in the offline world.
• What is the main focus of the hyperpersonal model in CMC?

  Self-disclosure motivations
• What is the significance of the findings from Whitty and Joinson's research?

  It supports the idea of different communication styles in CMC