The online space I explored for this analysis is a synchronous chatroom on Meebo.com, an in-browser instant messaging program which supports multiple IM services including Yahoo Messenger, AIM, Windows Live Messenger, ICQ and even Googletalk (en.Wikipedia.org). I entered this "experiment" with some reluctance because as I had revealed in my last entry, I've had some questionable experiences with chatrooms as a teenager. However, the chatroom identified as "20 and over" was small with no more than 8 people, and I assumed it would stay this way so I would keep my interactions within the chatroom (i.e. I would not instigate private conversation by "whispering" to the other participants).
I began my participation in the chatroom by using the name collegegirl, which provided a generic, but specific-enough cue about myself for other users of the chat. I was not surprised to see that the majority of users did not include a "real" name in their username. mrpenguin, unchangingwoman, dunebug, and the most popular, variations of guest_ _ _ _ (4 random numbers) are some examples of usernames I remembered. When I entered the chatroom, the conversation that was taking place allowed me to assume that some of them had been talking for a while, or at least talked to each other before. Mrpenguin responded with evident happiness when one user came into the room: "Yay, my little baby is back! Let me give you a :hug:" They acknowledged by presence in the room when I said hello; it was interesting to notice that they did not just continue on with their conversations when I entered, but it was really as if I entered a physical room and they acknowledged me because they just could not deny my presence. I asked them simple questions, how old they were, where they were from, what they were doing at the time. The majority responded with some interest; one user asked me where I was from and I responded "I'm from the east coast," and another user replied "YEA, EAST COAST!"
I assumed too quickly when I thought I wouldn't have to "whisper" to anyone or instigate private chat, because soon enough I was receiving whispers left and right. The infamous "a/s/l" question came up ALL the time in one form or another. I wasn't given substantial cues from many of the users; their usernames were either guest_ _ _ _ or the conversation died after I gave very limited, short responses to their questions. There was one very interesting and even a little concerning user I spoke to during this session, whose conversation I will elaborate on for this analysis.
His username was mk66 and he was one of the first to "whisper" to me. He introduced himself as Matt, so I assumed his status as a male. He came across as a warm, responsive person, answering my questions with interest and adding emoticons (mostly :) ). I was content to have found a person in the chatroom who was not really concerned with my stats (by asking questions like "how do you look" or "what are you wearing"), so I reciprocated with similar warm responses. However, I came to realize as I continued to talk to him that he was actually giving me a lot MORE information that I had asked for. One example I overlooked in the beginning of the conversation was when we were talking about sports. He shared that he enjoys bowling, and that he was a good bowler, too. I am also an avid bowler and I responded by telling him I enjoy bowling and volleyball tremendously. He then responds "my kind of girl. :)/i'm 6 4/160 lbs/my friend asked me to be his teammate." I clearly did not ask for his personal information, but he was compelled to tell me more than he needed. He then acted out of character (i.e. the character I assumed him to have based on very few and now realized as unreliable cues) and gave me his myspace address to check out a picture of him. I was a little bothered, but that was only the start of many disconcerting cues that made me form an extremely negative impression of him. He then began to share his VERY negative experiences of his past, that he lived with drug dealers, and got shot, and was bullied by other guys. He shared that he continues to be made fun of by guys, which is why he enjoys talking to girls (“they are more sensitive”). His decision to share this with me allowed me to assume that he wanted me to know that he enjoys talking to me. The biggest negative indication was one statement: “My friend called me right before I was going to hang myself/she literally saved me.” It took me a long time to respond to something that I consider something too serious and private to share with someone you’ve never met. Conversation slowed down exponentially, and he left a little while after, although he expressed his desire to speak to me again.
The development of my impression fit the Hyperpersonal theory, which caters to the extremes of positive and negative impressions. Over attribution processes and selective self-presentation played a major role in the development of my impression of Matt. I over attributed his interest in sports to an agreeable, likeable personality and responded with even more interest, which indicated to him that he could open up to me. His selective self-presentation allowed me to feel safe talking with him, but I realized at the end of the conversation that I had opened up too early to him based on his cues. I also over attributed his consciousness to other guys’ inappropriate behaviors online to a considerate person, and then was shocked to find out that he chose to share with me such personal information with me that made me feel very uncomfortable.
The hyperpersonal theory manifested itself in a very extreme manner in this encounter. I am still a little shocked that my experience was so extreme, but I assure you I DID NOT make this up. I don't think I'd want to make up such a thing. My only question is, will I ever come across this guy again, and what should I do if I do?
Monday, September 3, 2007
Assignment 2: Online Impression Formation
I had intended to analyze a “Wall to Wall” post between two Facebook users, but eventually my research expanded into several other aspects of Facebook, including its design and features. I also discovered how Facebook as a psychological space influences impression formation and Computer Mediated Communication. One easily viewable feature is the “Wall to Wall” link below each wall post. This allows one to view “conversations” between two Facebook users. Conversations that used to take place in real time (“synchronous”) now take days, similar to “telephone tag,” because only a few sentences at a time are exchanged. Facebook has facilitated asynchronous communication through its “Wall” feature. I would argue that this type of asynchronous communication allows for shorter, less detailed conversations, but enables one to “converse” with far more people. This trend away from face-to-face conversations and “instant” message conversations and towards quick, sporadic wall postings does not lead to more depth or a greater impression formation (as SIP would say). Instead, it leads to an easier time managing “acquaintances” and a more difficult time maintaining close friendships or relationships.
Facebook’s public nature also places some constraints on its content and impression formation. Now that Facebook is open to non-college students, it is publicly accessible by one’s employers, athletic coaches, and potential employers. This affects many decisions to post certain photos or mention certain personality traits and interests in one’s Facebook profile. Facebook provides a unique psychological space where impressions form differently than in other CMC or FTF environments. I first analyzed the “Profile” sections of several Facebook “friends.” While the profile section provides an adequate start to understanding a person’s interests and favorite activities, it did not provide a complete or even semi-accurate picture of my friends. The Profile section was often not updated recently. My test subjects’ tastes had often changed before they updated their profile. My experience with Facebook most aligns with the Hyperpersonal theory because the Profile Section encourages selective self-presentation, whereby we only reveal our most favorable personality traits through our Facebook pages. I would argue that SIP does not adequately represent the Facebook psychological space because “Profiles” do not give adequate views of a person. Fortunately, I used the impressions I had formed during FTF communication to guide my analysis of their Facebook pages; FTF remained the most accurate impression formation medium, while Facebook allowed me to “keep in touch” with many of my acquaintances through quick, asynchronous communication every now and then.
Assignment 2
Finding a chat room that isn’t saturated with requests to “share pics” or “chat with hot 17/m” is like finding a college student who doesn’t use Facebook. However, with a little perseverance, I managed to find a fairly innocuous chat room in which to make a new e-friend. In MySpace’s Alternative Music room, I watched as people with fashionably cryptic usernames chatted about nothing very important. When the conversation turned to siblings, I added that I was an only child. One girl commented that she was also an only child, noting that we were “ossm.” I seized the opportunity to get to know this fellow sibling-free alternative music listener and asked who her favorite bands were, sparking a conversation. By virtue of her pink font and presence in this particular chat room, I guessed that she was probably in high school. My guess was confirmed when I looked at her profile, which told me that she was a 16-year-old from the United Kingdom.
After chatting with this girl for about twenty minutes and simultaneously scanning her profile, which contained pictures and lists of her favorite things, I thought I had a pretty good grip on her personality. Through selective self-presentation she projected the image of an intelligent, entertainment-savvy adolescent prone to brooding. While her peers might have seen a hip girl who knew something they didn’t, her numerous photographic self-portraits and efforts to shirk conformity in all the usual ways struck me as pretentious. I didn’t hold this against her, though; we’ve all been sixteen and she seemed like a nice person.
Through chatting with her, I felt I had good reason to think she was agreeable, conscientious, and a bit introverted, which leads me to believe that I might not have found her attempts to appear superficially edgy quite as salient had we interacted face-to-face. Here, the hyperpersonal model scores a point; her selective self-presentation led me to form a more intense impression of her personality than I would have in a “real world” context, even though this intense impression was tempered by my own recognition of it possibly being an unfair assessment. The hyperpersonal model also accounts for how easily I pigeonholed her. Without enough first-hand interaction from which to glean information about her as an individual, I lumped my new friend into a category I formed sometime in high school. Since I had friends who presented themselves online in similar ways when we were sixteen, I assumed that she shared certain features with them, including mild neuroticism and a fairly high degree of openness. The hyperpersonal model calls this tendency to stereotype “overattribution processes.” I think behavioral confirmation, another feature of the hyperpersonal model, was also an important aspect of my interaction. Because I showed appreciation for her taste in music, she may have unconsciously presented a slightly more confident version of herself, helping to perpetuate my impression of her as a discerning listener. As for the developmental aspect of the hyperpersonal model, I think I would have been able to form a more comprehensive view of her personality if we chatted longer and more often. However, I think the breadth of my representation was enhanced by her profile, which the hyperpersonal model does not seem to account for. Though I have no way of knowing whether my impressions would have been dulled in a face-to-face interaction, there is reason to believe that the factors which make up the hyperpersonal model would lead to a more extreme online assessment of her personality. Overall, my impression of alternative music girl seems to be most consistent with this model’s predictions.
2 O.C.E.A.N.
For this week’s exercise, I decided to enter the Internet world of MySpace and observe a user’s profile. Of course, the first things I look at on their page are age, gender, and location (to determine race). The user is a 19-year old male from
Then, I move on to the bulk of his profile, filled with video clips and surveys, to formulate an impression. The responses to the survey are short and basic, but he is sharing some personal information –leading me to believe that he is somewhat open. I got the impression that he was immature because some of the responses are childish (“yukky”, or “I like hitting things on my head”). However, I think he is slightly conscientious when he jokes around about weight and fat jokes. With regard to neuroticism, I believe it is difficult to determine through this media, judging by the array of Florida Gator décor on his page, he might be obsessed, but it is inconclusive. It was also hard to determine if he was extraverted or agreeable. These results are relatively similar to the findings in Handcock & Dunham (2001). The colors he chose for his page were bright, and gave off a welcoming vibe while portraying a warm personality, as opposed to the coldness associated with the Internet.
I think that both the Hyperpersonal and the Cues Filtered Out theories contributed to my overall impression of the user. I based my impressions off of limited cues (the brief survey and information) and ended up generalizing to form an overall negative impression. I know that this impression is undeveloped because the cues provided were limited to what I could find on his page. I made a stereotypical generalization based on those few facts, which concur with the Hyperpersonal model. Then I see that he is part of the “Redneck yacht club” group and it confirms my generalization. From the little information gathered, I concluded that he was in irresponsible and childish - an overall negative impression.
------------------------------------------------
Comments:
http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/09/my-new-chat-room-buddy.html
http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/09/dissed-by-sox-girl.html
Chat Rooms are Creepy
For this assignment I went into a yahoo chatroom (while I was on Facebook and AIM). I first signed on with a screen name that was just a bunch of letters. The first room I went into a went into was a regional one for d.c. and within 30 second i was invited into a chat with a "21/f" inviting me to see their private video webcam, i declined. I went into a few other rooms but nobody really wanted to talk to me.
Finally i signed off and changed my screen name to a girls name katie19851234. As soon as I signed into a chat room on yahoo messenger I got 4 messages. I started talking to one guy and told him I was a 22 year old female from New York (nobody seemed to want to talk to me as a guy). The person I met was a 20 year old civil engineering student from Egypt. I am actually an engineer so we talked about engineering for a little bit and then we started asking each other questions about each others' countries. He started asking about my interests and talking about television shows. I talked with him for a bit and then told him I had to go do homework. He asked me to add him to my buddylist and then he signed of with "goodbye friend." He definitely showed openness, agreeableness. He was warm and seemed friendly but kind of nervous. I would say my impression was in line with hyperpersonal.
The second person I met was in a 'university years'chatroom. He was a 39 year pest exterminator from Vermont who went by the screenname 'sketchihitchhikr.' During our 5 minute conversation I learned what he did, where he was from, and that he had a 15 year old son. He also went on to inform me that his son was 15, tall, had red hair, and was a virgin. But that his son's friend lost his virginity at 13 and he himself lost his at 16. We finished up the conversation by him telling me that I was just a baby at 22 and me telling him that I had to go do homework. We left it at that. He was very creepy. He was way too open about information I didn't want to know and he was not conscientious at all about what was appropriate to say. I would say that I used the hyperpersonal model with him too and probably over attributed his characteristics based on his age and job. He seemed very in control and although he was very creepy he almost seemed friendly in a weird sort of way.
For both I used the hyperpersonal model. For the first guy, I definitely over-attributed him to being friendly but with the second guy I over-attributed him to being creepy. I did not have much to work with but everything I knew about them pointed to these conclusions. In both conversations, I wanted generalize the people I was talking to as college students but there was no way of knowing who would be in the chat rooms. For the developmental aspect, the two people I talked to switched from initial to final impression. At first I thought the friendly guy was creepy and the creepy guy was friendly but as I talked to them, I got a better impression of who they were. As for selective self-presentation, I was presenting myself as a 22 year old girl, but I have no idea if they were telling the truth. With the second guy, some of the things he said seemed so creepy and blunt that I almost have trouble believing that he wasn't being completely open.
In short, chat rooms are creepy and I'm not going back on.
Finally i signed off and changed my screen name to a girls name katie19851234. As soon as I signed into a chat room on yahoo messenger I got 4 messages. I started talking to one guy and told him I was a 22 year old female from New York (nobody seemed to want to talk to me as a guy). The person I met was a 20 year old civil engineering student from Egypt. I am actually an engineer so we talked about engineering for a little bit and then we started asking each other questions about each others' countries. He started asking about my interests and talking about television shows. I talked with him for a bit and then told him I had to go do homework. He asked me to add him to my buddylist and then he signed of with "goodbye friend." He definitely showed openness, agreeableness. He was warm and seemed friendly but kind of nervous. I would say my impression was in line with hyperpersonal.
The second person I met was in a 'university years'chatroom. He was a 39 year pest exterminator from Vermont who went by the screenname 'sketchihitchhikr.' During our 5 minute conversation I learned what he did, where he was from, and that he had a 15 year old son. He also went on to inform me that his son was 15, tall, had red hair, and was a virgin. But that his son's friend lost his virginity at 13 and he himself lost his at 16. We finished up the conversation by him telling me that I was just a baby at 22 and me telling him that I had to go do homework. We left it at that. He was very creepy. He was way too open about information I didn't want to know and he was not conscientious at all about what was appropriate to say. I would say that I used the hyperpersonal model with him too and probably over attributed his characteristics based on his age and job. He seemed very in control and although he was very creepy he almost seemed friendly in a weird sort of way.
For both I used the hyperpersonal model. For the first guy, I definitely over-attributed him to being friendly but with the second guy I over-attributed him to being creepy. I did not have much to work with but everything I knew about them pointed to these conclusions. In both conversations, I wanted generalize the people I was talking to as college students but there was no way of knowing who would be in the chat rooms. For the developmental aspect, the two people I talked to switched from initial to final impression. At first I thought the friendly guy was creepy and the creepy guy was friendly but as I talked to them, I got a better impression of who they were. As for selective self-presentation, I was presenting myself as a 22 year old girl, but I have no idea if they were telling the truth. With the second guy, some of the things he said seemed so creepy and blunt that I almost have trouble believing that he wasn't being completely open.
In short, chat rooms are creepy and I'm not going back on.
A teen chat
I googled chat rooms and at random picked freejavachat.com. I was more interested in observing than interacting, so I picked a room with a title suggesting that it was for teenagers, and didn't have a topic of discussion, just general chat. I also chose to limit the time I would spend observing my target to 5-10 minutes to see how drastically it would affect my impression.
I watched the chat progress for only a short time before one person stood out to me, I'll refer to him as L. On this site, you are assigned a nickname "Visitor_(some number)" until you change it yourself. L had a unique name, but one person in the room did not. L took it upon himself to preach to this visitor, telling him that he should pick a new name. Without prompting, L told the room the he had been going as "L" for years now. Once the visitor changed his name (admittedly, he changed it to something ridiculous), L engaged in a fairly normal conversation about the different countries of the world and their relative sizes. He also did not engage in a common practice of typing out descriptions of physical actions for humor, ie. "A slaps B in the face", when a few other people were goofing around with it.
From this short observation, I made several assumptions about L. I believe that he spends a lot of time in chat rooms, is probably over 20 years old, is male, and goes into chat rooms to engage in meaningful conversations. With my mental impression of L that I formed in a very short time, I don't feel that I'm able to describe his strengths in the big 5 traits with any sort of confidence. The observation gave me much stronger impressions about his physical attributes than his personality.
The intentional limitation of the time I observed L makes it hard for me to say with any conviction whether Social Information Processing applied to my experience. All I can say is that I observed L for a short time, and do not feel confident that I know his personality at all. This is in accordance with SIP because it says that in CMC more time is needed to exchange social information.
My encounter seemed to concur with CFO in the sense that the lack of cues prevented me from knowing anything about L's personality. I also know nothing about his likes, interests, personal life. Even though I watched him interact with several people, I feel that my impression of him is very shaky.
The hyperpersonal model didn't seem to fit my experience. I did not over-attribute L's personality traits. Perhaps this is because I didn't observe him long enough to see any threads to grab hold of, but it is also possible that I never would have found them. The developmental aspect of the HP model concurs with SIP, so on this point, I agree with the HP model. I didn't experience the other three criteria of the HP model. This could have been because of the limited time, or my particular subject's lack of self-disclosure.
I watched the chat progress for only a short time before one person stood out to me, I'll refer to him as L. On this site, you are assigned a nickname "Visitor_(some number)" until you change it yourself. L had a unique name, but one person in the room did not. L took it upon himself to preach to this visitor, telling him that he should pick a new name. Without prompting, L told the room the he had been going as "L" for years now. Once the visitor changed his name (admittedly, he changed it to something ridiculous), L engaged in a fairly normal conversation about the different countries of the world and their relative sizes. He also did not engage in a common practice of typing out descriptions of physical actions for humor, ie. "A slaps B in the face", when a few other people were goofing around with it.
From this short observation, I made several assumptions about L. I believe that he spends a lot of time in chat rooms, is probably over 20 years old, is male, and goes into chat rooms to engage in meaningful conversations. With my mental impression of L that I formed in a very short time, I don't feel that I'm able to describe his strengths in the big 5 traits with any sort of confidence. The observation gave me much stronger impressions about his physical attributes than his personality.
The intentional limitation of the time I observed L makes it hard for me to say with any conviction whether Social Information Processing applied to my experience. All I can say is that I observed L for a short time, and do not feel confident that I know his personality at all. This is in accordance with SIP because it says that in CMC more time is needed to exchange social information.
My encounter seemed to concur with CFO in the sense that the lack of cues prevented me from knowing anything about L's personality. I also know nothing about his likes, interests, personal life. Even though I watched him interact with several people, I feel that my impression of him is very shaky.
The hyperpersonal model didn't seem to fit my experience. I did not over-attribute L's personality traits. Perhaps this is because I didn't observe him long enough to see any threads to grab hold of, but it is also possible that I never would have found them. The developmental aspect of the HP model concurs with SIP, so on this point, I agree with the HP model. I didn't experience the other three criteria of the HP model. This could have been because of the limited time, or my particular subject's lack of self-disclosure.
Making Friends in the Dungeon: Assignment #2
Facebook and Myspace are nothing new to me. I have read hundreds of LiveJournals, pretended to be interested in a number of online dating services. However, there has always been something missing in my daily diet of online interaction. And now, finally I know what that something missing is: the chat room. The bliss of the synchronous communication between e-strangers is something to be embraced by all users of the Internet. And with topical chats ranging from "Cocker Spaniel Enthusiasts" to "Kenny G Fans United" the possibilities certainly are endless!
However, one must embark on their chat room experience with a certain level of apprehension. I have seen many an episode of "To Catch a Predator" (perhaps the reason I had never been to a chat room before), and did not wish to be approached by a married 47 year-old man looking for love in all the wrong places. Thus, I sought to join a chat room I felt would be a little more intellectually stimulating and a little less sexually charged. The result? I Google-searched "Magic cards" and a chattin' I went.
I have to admit, I'm not really sure what Magic: The Gathering is, or what the game entails (is it a game?), but I figured it would be unlike anything I had previously experienced on the Internet, to say the least. After registering on the given website, I entered the live chat with the most participants, and began my computer-mediated-communication.
While I had originally believed simply observing the chat would be sufficient to form an impression of a participant, I quickly learned that this was not the case. Within this RPG Live chat (which I was later told stands for Role Playing Game), there are many uncommon phrases and practices to be understood in order to even comprehend the conversations. For example, the chat allowed for users to type actions which would appear separate from their words. In a particularly entertaining exchange, two participants depart the chat room in a rather dramatic fashion:
Wings? Flying off? Was I missing something? Thankfully, Foxhengayokai who had immediately greeted me upon entering the chat answered all of my many, many questions. It turned out I was in a Dungeons & Dragons chat in which users frequently go back and forth between IC (in character, not Ithaca College) and OOC (out of character), which explains the flying reference. Many other fun facts about "D&D" were shared during our conversation, but I will let them remain mysteries for those of you who are yet to stumble upon such a chat. I highly recommend it.
Throughout my conversation with Foxhengayokai, my impression of this gamer became increasingly strong. First of all, since I joined the chat knowing the participants were online-gaming enthusiasts, I applied the stereotype that they would be fairly well-adverse at online interaction. Also, considering he was the only person to greet me when I entered the chat, and the speed at which he did so, I immediately considered Foxhengayokai to be an extraverted, warm person. Furthermore, Foxhengayokai seemed more than happy to answer my questions about the gaming world, achieving a level of control by enlightening me about a topic I had known nothing about.
Overall, my impression of Foxhengayokai was ultimately fitting with the Hyperpersonal Model. While I was privy to very little information about the person on the other end of the chat, I still came away with a very strong, positive impression of his personality. Similarly, in keeping with the SIDE theory, despite the limited amount of material shared with me, I was still able to fill in the blanks, in some ways exaggerating my impression.
Of course, the fact that my conversation with Foxhengayokai took place in a Dungeons and Dragons chat room did not escape my attention in forming an online impression of him. However, since he never once referred to spreading his wings and flying away, the gamer aspect of his persona was not nearly as pervasive as I had originally assumed all the chat room participants would be.
Foxhengayokai holds a special place in my heart. I had entered the D&D chat naive and alone, and left it knowing way more about the online gaming world than I could have imagined. All in all, I'd say I've sort of made an e-friend. Although, according to Foxhengayokai, its a good thing he wasn't playing one of his evil characters...
However, one must embark on their chat room experience with a certain level of apprehension. I have seen many an episode of "To Catch a Predator" (perhaps the reason I had never been to a chat room before), and did not wish to be approached by a married 47 year-old man looking for love in all the wrong places. Thus, I sought to join a chat room I felt would be a little more intellectually stimulating and a little less sexually charged. The result? I Google-searched "Magic cards" and a chattin' I went.
I have to admit, I'm not really sure what Magic: The Gathering is, or what the game entails (is it a game?), but I figured it would be unlike anything I had previously experienced on the Internet, to say the least. After registering on the given website, I entered the live chat with the most participants, and began my computer-mediated-communication.
While I had originally believed simply observing the chat would be sufficient to form an impression of a participant, I quickly learned that this was not the case. Within this RPG Live chat (which I was later told stands for Role Playing Game), there are many uncommon phrases and practices to be understood in order to even comprehend the conversations. For example, the chat allowed for users to type actions which would appear separate from their words. In a particularly entertaining exchange, two participants depart the chat room in a rather dramatic fashion:
Xiathanual: sighs
drakeZXI: glances to Xitha “sory hun… I can’t sit around here all day… I’ve got other things to do..”
Xiathanual: nods, I suppose your right
drakeZXI: hugs her softly before disappearing from the room…
Xiathanual: gets up, stretches her wings and waves to everyone before flying off
Wings? Flying off? Was I missing something? Thankfully, Foxhengayokai who had immediately greeted me upon entering the chat answered all of my many, many questions. It turned out I was in a Dungeons & Dragons chat in which users frequently go back and forth between IC (in character, not Ithaca College) and OOC (out of character), which explains the flying reference. Many other fun facts about "D&D" were shared during our conversation, but I will let them remain mysteries for those of you who are yet to stumble upon such a chat. I highly recommend it.
Throughout my conversation with Foxhengayokai, my impression of this gamer became increasingly strong. First of all, since I joined the chat knowing the participants were online-gaming enthusiasts, I applied the stereotype that they would be fairly well-adverse at online interaction. Also, considering he was the only person to greet me when I entered the chat, and the speed at which he did so, I immediately considered Foxhengayokai to be an extraverted, warm person. Furthermore, Foxhengayokai seemed more than happy to answer my questions about the gaming world, achieving a level of control by enlightening me about a topic I had known nothing about.
Overall, my impression of Foxhengayokai was ultimately fitting with the Hyperpersonal Model. While I was privy to very little information about the person on the other end of the chat, I still came away with a very strong, positive impression of his personality. Similarly, in keeping with the SIDE theory, despite the limited amount of material shared with me, I was still able to fill in the blanks, in some ways exaggerating my impression.
Of course, the fact that my conversation with Foxhengayokai took place in a Dungeons and Dragons chat room did not escape my attention in forming an online impression of him. However, since he never once referred to spreading his wings and flying away, the gamer aspect of his persona was not nearly as pervasive as I had originally assumed all the chat room participants would be.
Foxhengayokai holds a special place in my heart. I had entered the D&D chat naive and alone, and left it knowing way more about the online gaming world than I could have imagined. All in all, I'd say I've sort of made an e-friend. Although, according to Foxhengayokai, its a good thing he wasn't playing one of his evil characters...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)