My boyfriend (Dave) and I met in June of 2004 at a graduation party for one of our mutual friends. He went to a neighboring high-school and was obviously headed for a different college. Despite my initial doubts about the feasibility, we really hit it off and have been in a long-distance relationship since I came to Cornell. This seemed like the perfect example to use with relationship formation, although we did meet in real life initially, we then talked a lot using IM and the phone of course, especially once we left for school.
I decided that the Wallace attraction factors applied more to our relationship than the McKenna Relationship facilitation factors. The first of Wallace’s factors I chose is Proximity. Wallace argues that familiarity leads to attraction. In the FtF world, this means that being in the same location where you see each other a lot leads to familiarity and subsequent increased attraction. I had actually seen him at parties before but never had a real conversation. Perhaps this made him more attractive when we finally did have an engaging conversation. In online spaces, proximity can mean simply frequency of interaction, such as when you and a certain person frequent the same chat room or blog and get to ‘know’ each other. Once I had his screen name, it was easy to interact frequently using Instant Messenger. Since we inevitably spent a lot of time apart, we could interact through IM and be proximate in the online sense if not in the same physical location at the same time.
Wallace also describes Disinhibition effects in online attraction. This refers to the effect in which people are their more extreme selves online. Perhaps they are less afraid to show who they are since there seem to be fewer repercussions, this fits in with the Hyperpersonal Model of more extreme impressions and personalities formed online. I was initially fairly shy talking to Dave, and of course I wanted to make and maintain a good impression. We said goodbye after the party without exchanging numbers, however one of my friends had his screen name, so I decided to IM him. I am not sure I would have had the confidence to call him the next day even if I had known his number. It was easier for me to be the one to “put myself out there” and disclose more information about myself and vice versa in the medium of IM. We went on dates throughout the summer but both probably revealed the most personal information about ourselves online. I think Disinhibition played a role in these choices, and so does the fact that the act of IMing has a different, more relaxed connotation than calling. Additionally, selective self presentation could have played a role, since as we shared our interests etc. with each other we could both think more about what we said, while avoiding any awkward pauses in conversation. Throughout the summer we began talking on the phone more and more and that became our preferred media, since it seems easier to feel an emotional connection and is more comforting to hear the other persons voice, once we were separated at our different colleges.
5 comments:
First of all, congratulations on your successful long distance relationship, most couples have difficulty with distance, but it seems that you guys are doing just fine (three years…awesome!). I see how you classified your relationship factors as mainly Wallace, but did you think McKenna could also apply? For example, connecting to others allowed you to connect with your boyfriend across time and space (the distance factor); and from what I gather, your relationship has developed and grown mostly through computer-mediated communication, so I would say that the “getting the goods” factor could also apply – you got more information prior to seeing each other again. I love the fact that you decided to IM him; it’s so much less awkward than calling. When you said that you switched to phone conversations, I felt like your relationship also used the Media Richness theory, what do you think? Great post!
Amber, great post! I also second samantha's comment in congratulating you on such a successful long distance relationship.
I really enjoyed reading your post. I completely agree that it is much easier to 'put yourself out there' in CMC (such as AIM) than in person and express more personal information. Wallace's disinhibition theory definitely applies here and contributed to your increased attraction online. I also really liked how you mentioned and explained how the Hyperpersonal Model applied well to your situation.
Selective self presentation, as you mentioned, definitely does apply since you two did not know each too well before starting to IM. As a result, you probably would try and form the best impressions of each other online.
Well done on the post!
I... um, third? the congratulations on having such a successful long-term relationship.
I find this relationship to be very intriguing. In your experience, perhaps with couples who have been dating around the same amount of time as you and your boyfriend, would you say you know more/less/the same about each other as the couples who haven't relied so heavily on CMC? From personal experience I've definitely noticed that I'm more forthcoming with information via the Internet than in FtF. What do you think?
Hey Amber,
Nice post. I think you hit on a good point about proximity in CMC contexts. Just seeing a screenname on your buddy list every day seems to qualify as substantial online “intersection.” Your experience is also a good illustrator of how instant messaging facilitates disinhibition. It seems that the online context may have even speeded up the course of the relationship, allowing you to leave for college with a solid foundation. I’m sure common ground also played a large role in your relationship development online. The fact that this online communication was also supplemented by FtF interactions and talks on the phone also seems to demonstrate that while online communication can enhance a relationship, it is often not enough to sustain one.
Fascinating post, Amber,
I thought it was interesting how you were afraid to talk on the phone initially, yet you found that it was more comfortable to use IM to sort of build up a relationship before you started having more intimate, synchronous conversations. One would think that it is easier to build relationships nowadays with technologies like IM and email that facilitate the relationship building process. In the old days (you know, like 15 years ago), people did not have the advantages of IM services to assist in relationship building and it was more difficult to express inner feelings and disclose information about yourself. Mckenna refers to the relationship formation factors, where being able to express your true self and self-disclose to others often predicts relationships. With the advent of computer mediated communication, we can more carefully construct our relationships and build up a sense of comfort with one in order to facilitate our FtF communication.
Post a Comment