For the purpose of better analyzing the theories regarding media selection, I will focus on a specific example that a friend, “X”, recently encountered. For the past few months, X has had multiple disagreements with her friend, Y. Recently, she has felt aggravated by Y’s inability to empathize with her feelings, and therefore decided to confront Y about the status of their relationship. In order to do so, X chose to “accuse” her over email, a lean, mediated form of communication.
X’s choice to use a lean, mediated form of communication conforms to the Impression Management Theory. In this instance, the locus of the issue was focused away from the self towards Y, and the episode had a negative valence. X’s goal was to minimize the conversation’s benefits and avoid possible costs; therefore, she chose a the channel that would best help to regulate impression management. Because the valence of the episode was negative and directed away from X, X chose a mediated form of communication to create a “buffer” between her and Y, and to insulate her from Y’s immediate, and most likely negative, reaction. It is also possible, however, that the episode fits into the “confess” category, as X did make herself vulnerable by divulging to Y that her feelings were hurt by Y's actions. Here, there would be an even stronger incentive to use a mediated form of communication, as there is a greater need for control over the situation, which a mediated channel can provide. This situation does not support the Media Richness Theory, which would predict that because the situation was ambiguous rather than straightforward, X would rather chose a rich channel.
The second example regards a recent death within my family. After the death of a relative, I telephoned the decedent’s daughter in order to offer my condolences, rather than doing so over email. This experience is supported by both the Media Richness Theory and the Impression Management Model. In regards to the Media Richness Theory, the message was emotional and equivocal rather than straightforward. This played into my decision to telephone, which is a rich form of communication. The telephone offers a greater number of communication cues, allows for a more personal message, provides feedback, and offers the chance to use a wider variety of language and tone (all of which is important in an equivocal situation).
The experience is also supported by the Impression Management Model. Although I was not “praising” the family member per se, the message clearly had a positive valence, as I was trying to offer her positive support and empathy. In addition the locus of the issue was focused away from the self onto the party. Just as the model predicts, there was no need for a buffer in this situation, and a rich channel was optimal as it offers all the benefits of increased communication cues.
Comments:
http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-3-media-selections.html
http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/09/congratulations-i-want-to-talk-to-you.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hey,
I think you did a good job explaining the particular situations and why you or your friend chose the media you did. You also included good arguments for the theories that fit your experiences. I think it is interesting that certain situations seem to only fit one theory while others, such as calling someone to give your condolences regarding a death, support both theories in some ways. It is important to realize that with competing theories it is not always an 'either/or' decision, sometimes both have something to contribute to our understanding of media selection.
Nice analysis. It is interesting that in your second example, where both theories support the experience, it is definitely a more rational idea to call to offer condolences rather than email. However the X and Y communication is supported only by the Impression Management Theory. This might be an indicator that if X chose to call Y, it probably would not have resulted in a much different result. However, if you were to offer condolences by email, you would be regarded as tremendously rude and impersonal (for specific cultural reasons).
I disagree with your statement that a mediated channel means more "control." Email's asynchronous nature could create issues of timing of Y's response email which could mitigate the situation. Also, there have been many situations in which emails such as the one that X wrote Y, would allow Y too much time to read into or dwell on the written text, thus escalating the situation. Out of curiosity, what was Y's response? did Y respond using email or richer media?
I think that there is more control for the person managing the impression over a mediated channel because he has more time to formulate questions/responses rather than being grilled on the spot while subsequently having to manage his nonverbal impressions.
The entire conversation took place over email. I don't believe the conversation went very well in that they currently aren't speaking :( I don't know if a richer media would have changed the outcome, but that would be an interesting question to explore.
Post a Comment