Virtual relationships

• Self-disclosure:

  Revealing personal information about yourself. Romantic partners tend to reveal more information about themselves as the relationship develops. 
• Reduced cues theory Sproull and Kiesler (1986) self disclosure is lower. 

  Computer mediated communication lack we normally have in a face to face interactions e.g physical appearance but also cues about our emotional state e.g facial expressions and tone of voice. This leads to deindividuation which is where you have a reduced sense of identity. When you have a reduced sense of identity , it leads to disinhibition in relating to others- this means you behave in a way that you wouldn’t face to face. You become more blunt, aggressive etc and therefore less likely to self disclose. 
• hyper personal model. Walther (1996) self disclosure is higher

  Involve greater self disclosure than face to face so more personal. Computer mediated communication progress very quickly, self disclosure happened earlier and they become more intense and intimate. end more quickly as excitement levels peak very quickly. Selective self presentation occurs- sender manipulate their online image, choose which cues to send meaning they promote intimacy by behaving in an idealised way. Anonymity- people dont know your true identity may reveal more about yourself than you would to ‘real life’ partner. 
• gate refers to obstacle/barrier might prevent a relationship forming. Face to face interaction is gated, involves many features that interfere with the early development of relationship. 
• Absence of gating allows the relationship to ‘get off the ground’ in a way that is less likely in a face to face interaction. It allows the individuals to refocus on other factors and be less distracted by superficial characteristics that are important in a face to face relationship. It allows people to form online identities that they could never maintain in real life. 

  These gates can remain hidden which allows self disclosure and intimacy to develop. Then the gate may be revealed but because if the self disclosure it doesn’t matter as much now. 
• A strength of visual relationships is that there is research support for the hyper-personal model. Whitty and Joinson found evidence that people are hyperhonest and hyper dishonest. When individuals were presented with questions asked in online discussion, they tend to be direct, probing and intimate, with little small talk (like ftf). This supports the model because it demonstrates how we present ourselves in a positive light, in a selective way to aid relationships formation. 
• A weakness of visual relationships is that there is a lack of support for reduced cues. Walther and Tidwell suggest that the non-verbal cues are not absent, but are different online. The style and timing of a response may be different, such as not replying immediately or vice versa. Acrostics such as LOL and emojis are seen as substitutes for facial expressions. From this it would seem that the theory cannot account for his some online relationships are extremely personal, which is on the contrary to what this theory suggests.
• A strength if visual relationships is that there is research support for absence of gating. McKenna and Bargh looked at CMC used by lonely and socially anxious people. They found that these individuals were able to express their true selves more effectively than in ftf situations. 70% of relationships formed online survived more than 2 years, this was higher than the ftf relationships. This suggests that CMC can be a useful way form certain groups of people to for meaningful relationships. 
• A weakness of the research is that it dates very quickly. Most of the research examining virtual relationships was conducted in the late 1990s and early 2000s. As technology is changing rapidly, so is the nature of online relationships; psychological research in this area risks becoming outdated by the time it’s published. This lowers the temporal validity of research into online relationships.