The world of technology never sleeps. With the ongoing advancements being developed on a daily basis, it is bound that the internet will too change to a more modernized level. Nevertheless, the theories that have been made will still apply. For instance, the Social Presence Theory by Short, Williams, and Christie that states that no matter what, CMC compared to FtF communication will lead to decreased social presence and impoverished impression formation being that there is a lack of nonverbal clues available to make judgments from. Despite the changes with internet, CMC will never be the same as FtF communication. However, the Hyperpersonal Model and SIDE factors will also be applicable being that there are always a small amount of cues available, so inflated perceptions, either positive or negative, of one will be made. The theory of Problematic Internet Use will also still hold and more than likely increase as a problem amongst users. With added features and increase attractiveness, users will only develop more of a preference and attachment to the internet causing them to prefer on line interaction even more than now.
Some theories will have to be modified to fit the circumstances. New technologies with computers certainly have enhanced visuals whereas people will be able to communicate as if they are talking FtF. Although technology will not allow perception of cues as FtF would, overtime the gap will be bridged closer together. In the age of having built in cameras and virtual pictures as necessities for online networks, overtime the use and development of these visual aids will only increase. Thus theories such as the Reduced Social Context Cues will not hold as strongly as it does not under these circumstances because there will be more nonverbal cues available. It will not be as easy for one to focus on the negatives and base judgments solely on that. The Social Presence Theory will have to be modified as well being that with more visuals, in CMC social presence will increase and social distance will decrease.
Saturday, December 8, 2007
Friday, December 7, 2007
Bonus: Predicting the Future
It’s mindboggling to think that 20 years ago the Internet was barely in existence. Today the Internet governs mainstream culture. We do our homework on blogs, conduct business meetings through video chat, meet future spouses on social networking sites, and find information on virtually any topic of interest we could ever think of. It’s hard to imagine that it is possible for the Internet to become any more a part of our lives than it already is, but it is an inevitable progression of continually developing technology. How will the theories we learned in COMM 245 develop with it?
The increased use and advancement of Internet communicative technologies such as video-chat, Skype, and entire virtual-based worlds will significantly change the use of some of the theories we learned about. Certain theories like SIDE will stay constant, regardless of how open or detailed the Internet becomes. Whether someone is on the Internet talking over a live video feed or chatting on AIM, group identities and social categories will remain salient. That’s how it is in real life too.
Other theories that relate more to how a person chooses to present themselves, having the medium of the Internet in between to mask certain elements of their personality, will lose strength. It won’t be long before we are all communicating with each other in crystal clear digital video over the computer. The Hyperpersonal model and the Proteus Effect rely heavily on the idea that people can selectively self-present. Hyperpersonal says that people will latch on to the few cues that are given and exaggerate them. However, in the future, I don’t think CMC will have that much fewer cues than FtF. Concepts such as Social Distance Theory will continue to hold, because people will always want to choose the leanest media to lie, but the extent of its power will undoubtedly decrease. I don’t think that purely text-based CMC will be around for much longer. As the Internet becomes more advanced, there will be greater avenues for us to connect with other people and as we become more and more familiar with them, the gap between CMC and FtF will shrink. It will be interesting to see how this is analyzed with new theories.
Something I think will become more prevalent is the issue of Problematic Internet Use. With more advanced and new types of Internet technologies, there is greater likelihood for PIU. We rely on the Internet so much already, it is scary to think how much more is possible. However, I think after a point in time, such a high level of Internet use may become the normal, and even expected, at which point PIU may no longer be considered a problem.
I think this class did a great job of keeping up with the latest research and developments in social computing, but this is a continuously developing field, and therefore requires a continuously developing class. In the future, I think there will be even more emphasis on video and voice based CMC as opposed to text-based. I think that more attention will be given to the effects of Internet regulation once even more people are on it, even more regularly, exploring the ever-growing things that it offers. We talked a lot in COMM 245 about deception, particularly towards and from the people we interacted with online. More cues will make deception between people harder, but the greater problem will be deception by the owners and moderators of technologies and networks on the Internet, such as Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook. The recordability of the Internet will become a much bigger issue, and it will be interesting to see how that effects the way people interact over it. This class has introduced me to aspects of the Internet I did not even know existed. As dorky as it sounds, I find myself analyzing everything people do on the internet through the scope of COMM 245. I guess that means I learned something!
Bonus Assignment
The Internet changes rapidly. Five years ago popular social networks sites like Facebook were in their infancy. Ten years ago chat rooms were actually popular (gasp!). Twenty years ago the world wide web as we know it was little more than a collection of telephonically connected system of text-based bulletin boards. Thirty years ago few people, but professors and scientists connected over the web. As the Internet continues to change, our use of it and especially, our familiarity and acceptance of it has increased. This continual interweavening of life and the web will mean new discovers for social computing psychology and rethinking of previously excepted beliefs. Some theories will changes, others will continue to hold, and new issues will need to be addressed.
We already saw in our studies, that some psychology of social computing theories are beginning to lose their value. The Cues Filtered Out perspective may be becoming harder to apply as the breadth of communication channels on the web increases with photo and video sharing sites. New friends can immediately access a vast array of information (albeit likely self-representatively managed) on sites like Facebook and MySpace. Further, our knowledge and understanding of social norms and interaction practices on the web affects the way many of the CFO theorums suggest we might. The Hyperpersonal model says we should view new encounters as hyperboles of their real selfs; however, continued use of the Internet often builds target understanding and people come to expect these exaggerations-- perhaps, overlook them.
Other theories seem to stand up better to the advancement of the Internet. O'Sullivan's discussions of Impression Management relate that people will present themselves in the best light by holding back what they percieve less than ideal characteristics. We often studied how people use Facebook and how truthful their profiles are to their life. We found that consistently small lies are told to form a better self-representation. Some newer theories, such as the Proteus effect, which discusses the effect of online avatar use on personality and behavior stating a person will act as he percieve his or her online avatar would act based on its characteristics, seem to have created solid foundations that will be true on the net for years to come. Many of these theories, including the Proteus effect, are based off decades old research and ideas that held true offline and then are brought onto the web for new understanding. Frank and Gilovich dressed up study participates in black uniforms found them to more aggressive than subjects in white twenty years ago; now, Yee and Bailenson perceived similar results noting confidence with taller online avatars when they were forming the Proteus Effect.
As technology on the Internet continues to develop, new theories will have to be created to understand how people will use them to interact with one another and what implications these might have on society on the web. While our class has generally been on the cutting edge of technology and research (even reading scientific papers not yet in print), what is new is constantly changing and the web is so vast some things are bound to be overlooked. The online economy and commerce is one big aspect of social computing that this class didn't seem to delve into. While business and commerce may not seem like prime topics for social interaction studies, it is a major use of the internet and often an axis of interaction. People spend hours shopping on the web, writing reviews, trading experiences with products and merchants on discussion boards, comment chains, and chat. It is an excellent way to build common ground by finding people with similar tastes and creating shared experience purusing the same goods and wares.
Yet, even as we miss some things now, new and exciting developments on the web will come to change many of our current understandings. Currently, we are able to self-representation manage by creating personal profiles on social network sites or choosing our own avatars in 3D worlds like World of Warcraft. What if we come to a point were our whole lives are documented, recorded, and posted on the web. Every moment captured, every success detailed, and every failure displayed. Theories such as the Proteus effect and Impression Management, which I think are so enduring, might become completely obsolete. There was an article in the New Yorker (sorry no citation) about an old player at Microsoft who sought to put his entire world onto his computer. He carries a camera that snaps thousands of pictures a day-- every five seconds, when light changes, on demand, and when it senses motion. All his legal documents, childhood drawings and schoolwork, every email, consumer goods manuals, etc. everything has been uploaded to his computer. The goal of the project is to find ways to use all this information such as computer programs to automate biography and memoir writing. But, what if everyone's life was recorded in such a way and posted publicly? Then many of our ideas would cease to hold. We could no longer manage self-representations nor be affected by avatars (the avatar would be our true form 3D modeled). Online (gulp), we'd have to be ourselves.
We already saw in our studies, that some psychology of social computing theories are beginning to lose their value. The Cues Filtered Out perspective may be becoming harder to apply as the breadth of communication channels on the web increases with photo and video sharing sites. New friends can immediately access a vast array of information (albeit likely self-representatively managed) on sites like Facebook and MySpace. Further, our knowledge and understanding of social norms and interaction practices on the web affects the way many of the CFO theorums suggest we might. The Hyperpersonal model says we should view new encounters as hyperboles of their real selfs; however, continued use of the Internet often builds target understanding and people come to expect these exaggerations-- perhaps, overlook them.
Other theories seem to stand up better to the advancement of the Internet. O'Sullivan's discussions of Impression Management relate that people will present themselves in the best light by holding back what they percieve less than ideal characteristics. We often studied how people use Facebook and how truthful their profiles are to their life. We found that consistently small lies are told to form a better self-representation. Some newer theories, such as the Proteus effect, which discusses the effect of online avatar use on personality and behavior stating a person will act as he percieve his or her online avatar would act based on its characteristics, seem to have created solid foundations that will be true on the net for years to come. Many of these theories, including the Proteus effect, are based off decades old research and ideas that held true offline and then are brought onto the web for new understanding. Frank and Gilovich dressed up study participates in black uniforms found them to more aggressive than subjects in white twenty years ago; now, Yee and Bailenson perceived similar results noting confidence with taller online avatars when they were forming the Proteus Effect.
As technology on the Internet continues to develop, new theories will have to be created to understand how people will use them to interact with one another and what implications these might have on society on the web. While our class has generally been on the cutting edge of technology and research (even reading scientific papers not yet in print), what is new is constantly changing and the web is so vast some things are bound to be overlooked. The online economy and commerce is one big aspect of social computing that this class didn't seem to delve into. While business and commerce may not seem like prime topics for social interaction studies, it is a major use of the internet and often an axis of interaction. People spend hours shopping on the web, writing reviews, trading experiences with products and merchants on discussion boards, comment chains, and chat. It is an excellent way to build common ground by finding people with similar tastes and creating shared experience purusing the same goods and wares.
Yet, even as we miss some things now, new and exciting developments on the web will come to change many of our current understandings. Currently, we are able to self-representation manage by creating personal profiles on social network sites or choosing our own avatars in 3D worlds like World of Warcraft. What if we come to a point were our whole lives are documented, recorded, and posted on the web. Every moment captured, every success detailed, and every failure displayed. Theories such as the Proteus effect and Impression Management, which I think are so enduring, might become completely obsolete. There was an article in the New Yorker (sorry no citation) about an old player at Microsoft who sought to put his entire world onto his computer. He carries a camera that snaps thousands of pictures a day-- every five seconds, when light changes, on demand, and when it senses motion. All his legal documents, childhood drawings and schoolwork, every email, consumer goods manuals, etc. everything has been uploaded to his computer. The goal of the project is to find ways to use all this information such as computer programs to automate biography and memoir writing. But, what if everyone's life was recorded in such a way and posted publicly? Then many of our ideas would cease to hold. We could no longer manage self-representations nor be affected by avatars (the avatar would be our true form 3D modeled). Online (gulp), we'd have to be ourselves.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
12 | Trusting the Information Overlords?
Google has taken online advertising to a previously unimaginable level. Registered users for Google services, including the popular iGoogle feature, freely give away their search history and online behavior to the information giant. GMail users provide Google with personal email messages, which are read by machines to guess their interests and preferences. No, the good folks at Google aren’t watching you 24/7, but their machines are. Ads become tailored to people’s specific behavior, arguably helping the user by providing more relevant offers. However, there are times when information can go sour, as a man was convicted of murder after Google turned over his search activity for how to kill his wife. Just know that if it hasn't happened already, the time may come where Google will sell your search activity and interests to interested parties. Facebook has also been implicated in selling information to student’s employers and keeping tabs on people’s online behavior.
Although Google and Facebook have been responsible, or good at coverups, so far, the question still remains as to why we freely provide registration-based sites with so much personal information. Marketing and corporate impression management play a role in developing a trusting user base. Google’s colorful and kindergartenesque logo would never hurt a fly. Facebook manages a hip and youthful culture, allowing users to give friends naughty gifts and freely socialize with others, making it cool to be on Facebook. The Hyperpersonal Theory clarifies why we form such positive opinions; we form more intense impressions from very limited corporate branding information. Reallocation of cognitive resources dictates that we pay attention to the most obvious parts of a website, such as overall look and feel. Most web surfers know very little about the online economy, and retain their first impressions of a website based on looks and features. The over-attribution process also plays a role in impression formation; knowing Facebook was like MySpace turned me off a little at first, as I was quick to make a generalization. However, once the initial impression is formed, if the user likes the service, he or she will progressively continue to like it through the developmental aspect of the Hyperpersonal Theory, or quickly leave the site if he or she doesn't like it. Thus, just as the Hyperpersonal model applies to personality assessment, most users will make intense impressions about a website from initial interaction with limited cues. People either love the online service and stick with it for years to come, or simply click the back button.
Because the face to face meeting with the CEOs of Google and Facebook never occurs for most people, the intense CMC impressions stand the test of time, allowing initial users of Google and Facebook to continue using the technology despite bumps in the road every now and then (eg. the Facebook newsfeed).
SIDE also explains why we’re wiling to trust large websites with our personal information. What attracted me to Facebook was the fact that everyone was doing it; it felt more like a group to me. Although we can see each others’ pictures, I would argue that Facebook is visually anonymous because we can select how much we want to share through our profile, keeping it private and anonymous to some people. Facebook also takes advantage of Cornell’s group salience, motivating users to identify themselves with the school. Visual anonymity and group salience predict that users will like the group more and become more willing to conform and trust the group’s standards. Hence, Facebook users are more willing to trust it through group influence. Google also takes advantage of the SIDE theory, explaining why so many people are willing to use it. Visual anonymity is present with Google since we obviously can’t see other users’ activity. I also believe that Google has a group identity as well; Googling something has become so prominent that the phrase is now a household term.
The Hyperpersonal Theory predicts that we will continue to maintain our intensely positive opinions of Facebook and Google, until more information and cues are made available as in a face to face meetings. Should the day come where Google takes privacy issues a bit too far and its leaders are derided through public media, then I’d predict more users would be less willing to trust Google with this added, more personal information. The same applies for Facebook, as long as they can avoid bad press, no one will know about nor care about its use of our private information. After all, ignorance is bliss!
Although Google and Facebook have been responsible, or good at coverups, so far, the question still remains as to why we freely provide registration-based sites with so much personal information. Marketing and corporate impression management play a role in developing a trusting user base. Google’s colorful and kindergartenesque logo would never hurt a fly. Facebook manages a hip and youthful culture, allowing users to give friends naughty gifts and freely socialize with others, making it cool to be on Facebook. The Hyperpersonal Theory clarifies why we form such positive opinions; we form more intense impressions from very limited corporate branding information. Reallocation of cognitive resources dictates that we pay attention to the most obvious parts of a website, such as overall look and feel. Most web surfers know very little about the online economy, and retain their first impressions of a website based on looks and features. The over-attribution process also plays a role in impression formation; knowing Facebook was like MySpace turned me off a little at first, as I was quick to make a generalization. However, once the initial impression is formed, if the user likes the service, he or she will progressively continue to like it through the developmental aspect of the Hyperpersonal Theory, or quickly leave the site if he or she doesn't like it. Thus, just as the Hyperpersonal model applies to personality assessment, most users will make intense impressions about a website from initial interaction with limited cues. People either love the online service and stick with it for years to come, or simply click the back button.
Because the face to face meeting with the CEOs of Google and Facebook never occurs for most people, the intense CMC impressions stand the test of time, allowing initial users of Google and Facebook to continue using the technology despite bumps in the road every now and then (eg. the Facebook newsfeed).
SIDE also explains why we’re wiling to trust large websites with our personal information. What attracted me to Facebook was the fact that everyone was doing it; it felt more like a group to me. Although we can see each others’ pictures, I would argue that Facebook is visually anonymous because we can select how much we want to share through our profile, keeping it private and anonymous to some people. Facebook also takes advantage of Cornell’s group salience, motivating users to identify themselves with the school. Visual anonymity and group salience predict that users will like the group more and become more willing to conform and trust the group’s standards. Hence, Facebook users are more willing to trust it through group influence. Google also takes advantage of the SIDE theory, explaining why so many people are willing to use it. Visual anonymity is present with Google since we obviously can’t see other users’ activity. I also believe that Google has a group identity as well; Googling something has become so prominent that the phrase is now a household term.
The Hyperpersonal Theory predicts that we will continue to maintain our intensely positive opinions of Facebook and Google, until more information and cues are made available as in a face to face meetings. Should the day come where Google takes privacy issues a bit too far and its leaders are derided through public media, then I’d predict more users would be less willing to trust Google with this added, more personal information. The same applies for Facebook, as long as they can avoid bad press, no one will know about nor care about its use of our private information. After all, ignorance is bliss!
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
12: Last but not least....
In this course we have discussed a wide variety of theories that touch numerous issues that deal with online and mediated spaces. The internet and the online spaces we have discussed and the way we as individuals and groups use them seem to be ever changing. However, I feel that many of the theories and models that have been generated from studies and research will not change that much. I believe this because many of the theories deal with human tendencies and characteristics that seen innate. For example, the concept of gender signals being shown during CMC will remain the same because those are gradual socialized tendencies that we develop from a very young age and cannot just get rid of. Another theory that I believe will not go away is the Social Distance Theory because no matter the medium people feel uncomfortable when lying. In order to avoid that uncomfortable confrontation people will choose the leanest medium available to communicate in. No matter the time in history I believe people will always want to present the very best of themselves to other people therefore I think the concept of selective self presentation will remain steadfast as well.
However I think that aspects of Caplan’s model will intensify over time, because as the internet grows and more technologies emerge individuals who struggle with additions or have social problems in face to face will look towards mediated environment for interaction and entertainment. I also think that the theories about leaving virtuality will change, or at least will not be given much weight in the upcoming years because eventually I believe many relationships (friendship, personal, professional) will start in CMC and people will eventually learn what to expect when meeting someone in face to face.
In the future I think it would be interesting to do more research or have more discussions on the effects of merging media technologies, an example would be the iphone. The ability to connect at any moment to any piece of information will make people equipped to solve problems faster and reach people in theory networks instantaneously. All of this connectivity and information would be very a very powerful tool. However what would be the effects on family life, relationships or professional networks? Would they improve?
In coming semesters I would like to see COMM245 cover more on Blackberry and Iphones and the relationship between connectivity and productivity in the workplace.
Bonus Blog
Technology changes at a rapid rate. However, at some point the way we communicate can only change so much. Although it is hard to imagine what new methods of interaction can be developed in the near future, in many cases, certain means of communication have evolved as much as they will. The technology behind video phones has been around quite a while. However, they never caught on, because people do not want their media to that salient. They want to be able to limit the nonverbal cues that the person they are communicating with receives.
What I see as the significant change happening is the portability of communication. In just the past few years cell phones have become a part of every day life. The popularity of cell phones are rendering payphones obsolete. In fact, AT&T just announced that they will no longer be offering payphone services
Phones becoming wireless is just the beginning. Text messaging allows for short messages anywhere and developing data technologies allow for wireless internet everywhere. With wireless, people can be connected anywhere. They can use AIM portably or even facebook wherever they want.
The advancements that I see changing the way people communicate come through portability. The blackberry already allows people to email from wherever and whenever they want. As time goes on, computers will get smaller, work faster, and draw less power. If you want to go into concept theories in a few years mini fuel cell and wireless power should start coming around allowing for nonstop use of portable computers. Future technology could eventually shrink computer displays from glasses with a built in screen (which exist now) to a monitor built into a contact lens.
I think the class does a fairly good job of touching on most branches of social computing. To finish off I am detailing my new communication method for the future. I have decided that in the future there will be a system called moose. By using moose you can telepathically message anyone. It is an asynchronous system. When using moose you will have to check your telepathic messages by directly hooking your brain up to the internet. However since everything is wireless. This will not be a problem. You can connect anywhere. The beauty of moose is that it is not recordable. As soon as you receive a message, you forget it. This makes it a great medium for breaking bad news.
11: more than i expected
I came to Cornell as a transfer student last year but the summer before I actually arrived on campus I added the Cornell network to my Facebook profile. As soon as I added this network I started receiving and friend requests from other incoming transfers. There was one student in particular that messaged me frequently because after some initial conversing we learned that we would be living on the same floor in the transfer center. We learned that we had a lot in common (activities, interests), and so from our conversations online I felt as if I definitely knew this person well and was looking forward to meeting them in person. I definitely felt as though there was anticipated future interaction between the both of us.
When late August came around I actually was able to meet this individual, and unlike what Ramirez and Wang claimed, my online transfer buddy and I actually became great friends and still are. I was not at all disappointed or let down when we first had the chance to meet. It was not hard to move our friendship from CMC to offline/ face-to-face. One of the major claims that Ramirez and Wang make is that that “there is uncertainty- provoking relative to interacting via CMC”. In my response to that though, there may have been some slight awkwardness but it quickly dissipated once we “broke the ice” by chatting about the topics we had discussed previously online.
So then I believe this relationship with my fellow transfer buddy supports Berger & Calabrese’s Uncertainty Reduction Theory because the more we interacted and disclosed information about ourselves there was a greater sense of camaraderie, friendship and intimacy. I think overall meeting and becoming friends in reality actually made our relationship stronger because we are now able to learn more about one another through face-to-face interaction. Maybe leaving virtuality isn’t that bad after all.
COMMENTS:
Monday, December 3, 2007
Moving Forward...
As I look back on all I have learned this semester about the psychology of social computing as a legitimate, complex field of study, I am amazed. I'll be the first one to admit that I thought this class was going to be one of those "common sense" classes where as long as you take a look around you once in a while and know what's going on in the world, or in this case, what's going on on the internet, you'd be fine.
However, I found that the more theories I learned, I was not only able to apply those theories to my own life and the life of those around me, but that - surprise - I actually had to study! The great thing was, I didn't really mind. I'm not trying to sound like a total brown-nose, but one of the best things about this class was how current the curriculum was. For that same reason, I feel like the field of study will be growing and changing by leaps and bounds in the future. At the same time, I think some theories will be able to be applied even as technology and research advance. For one thing, a lot of more current theories seem to have roots in the Hyperpersonal Model. The idea that because we have fewer cues, we rely more heavily on those cues and thus attribute stronger characteristics to the person 'across the screen' is, I think, one that will persist even as more current theories develop.
As for what will change in the future, I have already alluded that the types of technology that connect us will most likely evolve. Already, since the publishing of Wallace's book, there have been several changes, such as the text-message craze, and the invention of the video chat. I have a feeling that more "arcane" (if that word can even be used in this context) forms of CMC, such as discussion forums, where time is irreparably asynchronous, will fade out, and more advanced forms of CMC, such as the previously mentioned video chat, will become more popular. With the advances in technology will come different theories because new cues will be introduced, and I think the CFO-perspective will eventually be entirely rejected.
Overall, I think the class covered a wide variety of topics, from social norms to gender differences and internet addiction. One thing I would have liked to have delved a little deeper into was exactly why people feel compelled to spend hours of time on the internet, with nothing to show for it. Perhaps in the future there will be more convincing research on the topic of internet addiction, or whatever it may be deemed. Also, I would have also been interested to learn about research concerning how people are affected by communicating more by CMC, and if a lack of what I deem to be 'real personal connection' caused their overall well-being to deteriorate. My intuition is that the more time people spend away from each other, staring at a screen or with their ear pressed against a phone, the less warmth they are able to derive from the person they are communicating with. I feel like humans are designed to depend on the presence of, and interaction with others on a daily basis.
Thanks for a great semester, I really enjoyed the class. :)
That's all!
However, I found that the more theories I learned, I was not only able to apply those theories to my own life and the life of those around me, but that - surprise - I actually had to study! The great thing was, I didn't really mind. I'm not trying to sound like a total brown-nose, but one of the best things about this class was how current the curriculum was. For that same reason, I feel like the field of study will be growing and changing by leaps and bounds in the future. At the same time, I think some theories will be able to be applied even as technology and research advance. For one thing, a lot of more current theories seem to have roots in the Hyperpersonal Model. The idea that because we have fewer cues, we rely more heavily on those cues and thus attribute stronger characteristics to the person 'across the screen' is, I think, one that will persist even as more current theories develop.
As for what will change in the future, I have already alluded that the types of technology that connect us will most likely evolve. Already, since the publishing of Wallace's book, there have been several changes, such as the text-message craze, and the invention of the video chat. I have a feeling that more "arcane" (if that word can even be used in this context) forms of CMC, such as discussion forums, where time is irreparably asynchronous, will fade out, and more advanced forms of CMC, such as the previously mentioned video chat, will become more popular. With the advances in technology will come different theories because new cues will be introduced, and I think the CFO-perspective will eventually be entirely rejected.
Overall, I think the class covered a wide variety of topics, from social norms to gender differences and internet addiction. One thing I would have liked to have delved a little deeper into was exactly why people feel compelled to spend hours of time on the internet, with nothing to show for it. Perhaps in the future there will be more convincing research on the topic of internet addiction, or whatever it may be deemed. Also, I would have also been interested to learn about research concerning how people are affected by communicating more by CMC, and if a lack of what I deem to be 'real personal connection' caused their overall well-being to deteriorate. My intuition is that the more time people spend away from each other, staring at a screen or with their ear pressed against a phone, the less warmth they are able to derive from the person they are communicating with. I feel like humans are designed to depend on the presence of, and interaction with others on a daily basis.
Thanks for a great semester, I really enjoyed the class. :)
That's all!
Sci Fi for the Next Millenium? (Bonus Blog)
Thirty years ago, the world wide web was a subject of science fiction, some all-knowing being that stored and retrieved endless amounts of information and which connected everyone across the world, perhaps even throughout the galaxy. Today, most of that outrageous fan fiction has come to pass (minus the galaxy part), and yet, we have not yet reached a status quo. Internet content is constantly being added, removed, or edited, resulting in an ever-evolving tool that has a great deal of social utility, but may also cause some public detriment. The internet, in this constant state of upheaval, still has some defining characteristics that will always hold.
No matter how many interactive features the internet adopts (text, voice, facebook walls, videoconferencing, etc.), it will never match the richness of the face-to-face communication experience. This will result in those who feel inept in face to face social situations and those suffering from loneliness and depression using a medium with fewer cues to try to selectively self present themselves. Upon positive feedback from this approach, behavioral conditioning may eventually lead to problematic internet usage. Futhermore, there will always be marketing schemes to hook internet users onto a given site, game, etc. This will further lead to problematic usage that rivals some of the addictions of Halo or Everquest on their gamers.
On the other hand, due to reduced cues, digital deception will no doubt be a permanent factor in the online world. Emails asking you to confirm your bank account pin number or convincing you that a rich widow in Britain has left you as the executor of her estate are rampant, and likely to continue. Furthermore, misrepresentation of age, sex, or location in online chat rooms will continue as a manifestation of curiosity or the human inclination to role-play.
In highlighting the “public good” aspect of the internet, as the web does become more interactive and a hub for people of diverse backgrounds and interests, those with similar issues and interests will no doubt continue to band together in special interest groups or support sites. Support will continue due to the individualizing effect of the net on problem solving. In a crowded room, one is less likely to help an individual (figuring that someone else will do it) than if you were the only other person there. With the internet, you don’t know if that message calling out for help is being overlooked by all other internet users and so you are inclined to provide some help yourself. Furthermore, with the removal of physical barriers to communication, it is easier to find that special someone on the other side of the world who shares your interest in Japanese toilet seats or Pretty Princess Wedding Cakes.
Furthermore, the internet will always have a leviathan of sorts, even if it is composed of all of its users. There must be social norms in place that cannot be violated without public ostracization or punishment. A tool of such great power must be kept in check by someone, if not everyone.
The social networking phenomenon will probably also continue, although perhaps at a less extreme extent. Now that its new, it probably has a lot more appeal than it will in a decade or so, although people will probably go on occasionally for information gathering purposes or to stay in touch as we society globalizes.
One issue that will need to be addressed before social networking can continue, however, is the harvesting and sale of personal information to potential employers or any other interested party. In order to not deter users from networking online, this potential threat must be removed.
One aspect I think this class could further address is the psychology of ethics online. Why do people feel abhorrence for stealing a CD from a store while they feel less responsibility or threat at illegally downloading songs/movies/software? I feel this would be an interesting field to explore in more detail.
No matter how many interactive features the internet adopts (text, voice, facebook walls, videoconferencing, etc.), it will never match the richness of the face-to-face communication experience. This will result in those who feel inept in face to face social situations and those suffering from loneliness and depression using a medium with fewer cues to try to selectively self present themselves. Upon positive feedback from this approach, behavioral conditioning may eventually lead to problematic internet usage. Futhermore, there will always be marketing schemes to hook internet users onto a given site, game, etc. This will further lead to problematic usage that rivals some of the addictions of Halo or Everquest on their gamers.
On the other hand, due to reduced cues, digital deception will no doubt be a permanent factor in the online world. Emails asking you to confirm your bank account pin number or convincing you that a rich widow in Britain has left you as the executor of her estate are rampant, and likely to continue. Furthermore, misrepresentation of age, sex, or location in online chat rooms will continue as a manifestation of curiosity or the human inclination to role-play.
In highlighting the “public good” aspect of the internet, as the web does become more interactive and a hub for people of diverse backgrounds and interests, those with similar issues and interests will no doubt continue to band together in special interest groups or support sites. Support will continue due to the individualizing effect of the net on problem solving. In a crowded room, one is less likely to help an individual (figuring that someone else will do it) than if you were the only other person there. With the internet, you don’t know if that message calling out for help is being overlooked by all other internet users and so you are inclined to provide some help yourself. Furthermore, with the removal of physical barriers to communication, it is easier to find that special someone on the other side of the world who shares your interest in Japanese toilet seats or Pretty Princess Wedding Cakes.
Furthermore, the internet will always have a leviathan of sorts, even if it is composed of all of its users. There must be social norms in place that cannot be violated without public ostracization or punishment. A tool of such great power must be kept in check by someone, if not everyone.
The social networking phenomenon will probably also continue, although perhaps at a less extreme extent. Now that its new, it probably has a lot more appeal than it will in a decade or so, although people will probably go on occasionally for information gathering purposes or to stay in touch as we society globalizes.
One issue that will need to be addressed before social networking can continue, however, is the harvesting and sale of personal information to potential employers or any other interested party. In order to not deter users from networking online, this potential threat must be removed.
One aspect I think this class could further address is the psychology of ethics online. Why do people feel abhorrence for stealing a CD from a store while they feel less responsibility or threat at illegally downloading songs/movies/software? I feel this would be an interesting field to explore in more detail.
Idk my bff crystal ball?
I am not well known for my clairvoyant abilities, but I would be glad to take a few stabs at what the future will hold, and what it will drop. Which theories will survive, with bits and pieces still intact to provide a moderate living for researchers and professors, which will crumble like the life of a World of Warcraft player, and finally, which will cling on to a semblance of validity, bouncing up and down in the academic limbo until some new comer finally puts it out of misery?
While scientific theories are rarely permanent, there are some that tend to last for a while before kicking the bucket. I believe that the Proteus Effect as supported by Yee and Bailenson’s research is yet to approach the bucket; in fact I think it will be a very long time before someone would approach it with any container of a cylindrical nature. As the virtual world grows more complex and become more reflective of reality, people will further adapt to their virtual persona, thus allowing their online personality to mirror closely to their avatar. The new generations of online games, for example, tend to allow more and more customization for the characters, so players would feel even more immersed in the virtual world and take on the expected behavior of their avatars. This naturally leads to the next phenomenon that will undoubted thrive in the future – online addiction. With the number of WoW users approaching the population of Sweden, it would not be absurd to claim that in time the trend of online gaming, will expand to even more Internet users. “Logging in” to a virtual world may become easier and even more accessible, fueling the addiction and people’s need for escape to a fantasy world, eventually abandoning their grim reality:
The Hyperpersonal Model, however, will not fare as well. As online interaction become more open and advanced, exchange done through CMC may very well reach the same intimacy offered by FtF. Even now we can communicate online using video conferencing, which greatly increases the number of cues offered through CMC. It is not out of the line to presume that future online communications will be so similar to face to face that people will no longer form different breadth/depth of impression in different media. Likewise, the Uncertainty Reduction Theory will no longer be relevant as future CMC interaction, with more available cues and detail, will not leave much uncertainty in the minds of the users. When the users finally leave virtuality, the modality switch won’t be apparent and thus there will not be an increase in attraction. On the other hand Impression Management Model (by O’Sullivan) will likely retain some usefulness for a period of time (stay in limbo), because it would take a long time before CMC can become as transparent as FtF, so people will still try to regulate their behavior to form specific impressions, however limited the control may be.
Some new issues and technologies that need to be addressed are: online addiction (as mentioned previously), privacy, and social networks. Privacy will be a significant concern. As more information becomes available online, people start to lose the veil of anonymity and may be threatened by all types of identity theft. Social networks will experience a large growth as a result of ubiquitous internet access and the ease of online interaction, but also face the problem of privacy loss due to the inherent lack of security in a virtual network (which may or may not be improved in the future).
While I personally thought that COMM 245 was very comprehensive and covered an interesting and wide array of subjects, I wish that we could have discussed more on the contemporarily political issues circling the virtual environment, for example, the controversy regarding government agencies demanding information from internet service providers and the fight over the legality of P2P programs and online gambling websites.
Predicting the Future (Bonus Assignment)
In the past ten years, the internet has already affected so many business models, relationships, and the flow of information. With so much multitasking and other behaviors affected by the internet, it seems that the internet will continue to influence our behaviors, self-image, and decision-making. COMM 245 has influenced the way I analyze and interpret how we manage ourselves online, how social networking affects us, and how the psychological spaces and their attributes have affected social computing.
There are two major theories that I believe will not change too much as the internet progresses (the impression management model and the hyperpersonal model). I would argue that some theories will not hold water in the future (especially the cues filtered out theory). I think we will continue to choose whether or not we want to mediate our communication based on locus and valence (O’Sullivan). I also think most people will continue to take active steps to manage their own image and engage in selective self-presentation and put their “best foot forward.” On the other hand, we will definitely not have poor, underdeveloped impressions of others just because there are reduced social context cues in a CMC environment (CFO perspective).
One of the major issues that will need to be addressed is the issue of weighing selective self-presentation with portraying an accurate version of oneself. Many of us maintain Facebook and other online profiles, but do not update them too regularly or do not provide enough detail to make them accurate. As more employers do online research about their potential hires, it will become more and more important in the future that one be portrayed of course in the best light, but weighing that portrayal with accurate facts.
I have enjoyed COMM 245, as it is one of the most pertinent and practical classes for someone with my interests in media, technology, and the internet. As both a user and a scholar of the Internet and internet-related theories, I can now analyze internet usage from both perspectives and form more informed positions. My only suggestion for COMM 245 in the future is to make it even more applied and practical by focusing on how we can effect change in our online behaviors and how we can understand the effects of how ecommerce is now a social process.
Crystal Ball Blog
The Internet has changed the world in many ways. The fact that I can sit in my room in Ithaca, New York and be connected to billions of users all across the globe is mind boggling. Online shopping, games, chatting, downloading music and movies, blogs, and social networking sites are just a few of the endless options that the Internet has to offer. Psychology of Social Computing has been one of the most interesting classes I’ve taken at Cornell thus far because the theories and lessons apply directly to things going on in my life. It is important to have classes like this that change with the times. Many of the ideas that were presented this semester were not applicable ten years ago.
Three theories that stand out in my mind from this semester are selective self-presentation, SIP, and cues filtered out. I think that the first two theories will always be a part of the Internet. Humans will not outgrow the tendency to selectively present themselves because most of the time there is a certain way we want others to see us. As far as SIP is concerned, we have learned this semester that over time you will be able to get to know someone through CMC, it just takes longer. Humans will continue to adapt to others over time. Cues-filtered-out theory has been disproved again and again throughout the semester. We have learned that you can develop relationships through online communication and it may not always be negative. Even though this theory doesn’t hold true, it is important to learn about it so that we can see how the internet and our beliefs about it have developed.
One aspect of the Internet that seems to be up and coming is video chat. It would be interesting to see what theories apply to this since this method of communication involves visuals. Also, do people prefer talking to strangers through video chat or would they rather talk on IM and keep that sense of anonymity? Often I prefer talking on instant messenger so that I don’t have to worry about what I’m wearing or what my hair looks like. This would be an interesting topic to research.
Although the semester is over, I know that I will continue to use the principles and theories learned in Comm 245. I, of course, will continue to use the Internet and will be able to apply these ideas to other communication classes. Thanks for a great semester; I’ll miss the brown blog!
Three theories that stand out in my mind from this semester are selective self-presentation, SIP, and cues filtered out. I think that the first two theories will always be a part of the Internet. Humans will not outgrow the tendency to selectively present themselves because most of the time there is a certain way we want others to see us. As far as SIP is concerned, we have learned this semester that over time you will be able to get to know someone through CMC, it just takes longer. Humans will continue to adapt to others over time. Cues-filtered-out theory has been disproved again and again throughout the semester. We have learned that you can develop relationships through online communication and it may not always be negative. Even though this theory doesn’t hold true, it is important to learn about it so that we can see how the internet and our beliefs about it have developed.
One aspect of the Internet that seems to be up and coming is video chat. It would be interesting to see what theories apply to this since this method of communication involves visuals. Also, do people prefer talking to strangers through video chat or would they rather talk on IM and keep that sense of anonymity? Often I prefer talking on instant messenger so that I don’t have to worry about what I’m wearing or what my hair looks like. This would be an interesting topic to research.
Although the semester is over, I know that I will continue to use the principles and theories learned in Comm 245. I, of course, will continue to use the Internet and will be able to apply these ideas to other communication classes. Thanks for a great semester; I’ll miss the brown blog!
What the Future Holds (Bonus Blog)
I think many of the theories we have studied this semester will hold in the future, especially those of selective self-presentation. As the internet grows and becomes more complex it is likely that it will be easier for people to deceive other online. However, the possibility also arises that is will become easier to detect online deception. I think other issues that will need to be addressed will arise from social networking sites such as Facebook and the impact they are going to have on people’s future opportunities because of the selective self-presentation and impression formation opportunities they provide. Although we don’t know what Mark Zuckerberg has in store for Facebook’s future, it is likely that that the network will become more complex. The employers of my generation have already found ways to do background checks on interviewees and it is inevitable that what people have in their Facebook profiles now might come back to haunt them.
Although not directly studied in COMM 245, I think a major issue that will need to be addressed in the future is the impact of the internet on the television industry. Google has grown to be the one of the most powerful Fortune 500 companies in America within a mere ten years of being founded. Perhaps the company’s biggest accomplishment is revolutionizing one of the driving forces of the entire media industry—advertising. By only displaying ads that are relevant to customers’ search topics Google has raised billions of dollars in advertising revenue and has become more effective at advertising than traditional forms of media, especially television. It will be interesting to see how the television industry will deal with the ever-growing force of the internet, that is, if it is able to survive at all.
A subject I have always been fascinated with that I think COMM 245 should cover is intellectual property on the internet. Most people would never even consider stealing something, but for some reason when it comes to movies, music, etc. on the internet, peoples’ usual moral rules just don’t hold up. The internet makes music seem as free as air and the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) has begun to fine people up to $250,000 for illegal downloading. Our own campus has even taken measures to address this issue with the introduction of Ruckus network back in October, which allows Cornell students to legally download music. I think COMM 245 should definitely explore the phenomenon of illegal downloads and what makes people push their ethical standards aside to break the law.
As a Comm. Major I have been studying the effect of the internet for years. COMM 245 has not only enhanced my previous knowledge, but has also opened my eyes to a lot of aspects of the internet I had never even considered. In addition to the possibilities the future of the internet holds, it is equally worthy to contemplate what lessons COMM 245 will teach in thirty years from now!
Although not directly studied in COMM 245, I think a major issue that will need to be addressed in the future is the impact of the internet on the television industry. Google has grown to be the one of the most powerful Fortune 500 companies in America within a mere ten years of being founded. Perhaps the company’s biggest accomplishment is revolutionizing one of the driving forces of the entire media industry—advertising. By only displaying ads that are relevant to customers’ search topics Google has raised billions of dollars in advertising revenue and has become more effective at advertising than traditional forms of media, especially television. It will be interesting to see how the television industry will deal with the ever-growing force of the internet, that is, if it is able to survive at all.
A subject I have always been fascinated with that I think COMM 245 should cover is intellectual property on the internet. Most people would never even consider stealing something, but for some reason when it comes to movies, music, etc. on the internet, peoples’ usual moral rules just don’t hold up. The internet makes music seem as free as air and the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) has begun to fine people up to $250,000 for illegal downloading. Our own campus has even taken measures to address this issue with the introduction of Ruckus network back in October, which allows Cornell students to legally download music. I think COMM 245 should definitely explore the phenomenon of illegal downloads and what makes people push their ethical standards aside to break the law.
As a Comm. Major I have been studying the effect of the internet for years. COMM 245 has not only enhanced my previous knowledge, but has also opened my eyes to a lot of aspects of the internet I had never even considered. In addition to the possibilities the future of the internet holds, it is equally worthy to contemplate what lessons COMM 245 will teach in thirty years from now!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)