Virtual relationships in social media

• McKenna and Bargh (1999) argue 'gates' (e.g facial disfigurements or a stammer) may be obstacles to a FtF relationship.

  Gates absent in virtual relationships - so more likely to 'get off the ground' than FtF relationships, self-disclosures become deeper. Without gates, people free to be more like their 'true selves', or can create untrue identities to decieve people.
• -- Lack of support for reduced cues theory. Online cues aren't absent but different from FtF. Acronyms, emoticons and emojis are effective substitutes for FtF nonverbal cues such as facial expressions (Walther and Tidwell). Hard for reduced cues theory to explain because it suggests virtual relationships can be as personal as FtF.
• --Lack of research support for hyperpersonal model. Ruppel et al.'s (2007) meta-analysis compared frequency, breadth and depth of self-disclosures in FtF and virtual relationships. In self-report studies, self-disclosure was greater in FtF relationships on all three measures. In experimental studies there were no sig differences. Challenges the model's view greater intimacy in virtual relationships should lead to greater self-disclosure than FtF.
• ++ Support for absence of gating in virtual relationships. McKenna and Bargh (2000) studied online communication by shy and socially anxious people. 71% of romantic relationships formed online survived 2y+, compared to 49% formed online (Kirkpatrick and Davis 1994). Suggests shy people do benefit online presumably because the gating that obstructs FtF relationships is absent online.