#12 - Have you had a day without any online activity?

Personally, I barely go through a day without using Internet. I have to check e-mails at least a couple of times a day, homework and studying materials are uploaded in blackboard, and talking to friends now mostly takes place on a messenger program. As time goes by, I find more social activities are being practiced online or at least becoming available online as well as offline.

A rapid increase in use of Internet is changing the expectation and perception of online social
computing. At the early stage of Internet, Cues Filtered Out Perspective assumed CMC would only be able to provide a few cues that will lead to develop impoverished relationship. However, as rapid development in technology brings more features to the Internet, this theory would not be valid any more. Although, at first, all human interactions in CMC were only text-based, these days, all of text, audio and visual aspects of human interaction can be provided in CMC. Therefore, CMC does not necessarily lead to decreased social presence unless it is specifically chosen to have certain feature only.

However, there are some theories that will always hold even in the future. Over-attribution processes and selective self-presentation factors in Hyperpersonal Model are examples of this case. Over-attribution processes say that fewer cues can lead a person to develop an intense impression of his partner in both positive and negative ways depends on the initial impression. Selective self-presentation says people selectively present themselves online, so that their partners would perceive them in the way they want to be perceived. This tendency would always hold and may be even intensified in the future of CMC social computing because more development on technology would offer more options for people to choose in their presentation online. According to the image they want to create, they can choose the most appropriate tool to have more effective selective self-presentation. As it becomes more successful to present a person in a desired way, it would be more susceptible for other people to believe in the image and to develop more intense impression.

As more online social interactions are expected, balancing between CMC and FtF interactions would be needed to be addressed. Already, there have been cases of people having troubles with compulsive Internet use. Some cases even led to murders and suicides. In the future, conducting various experiments on identifying the causes and impacts of problematic Internet use would make it possible to develop theories that explain the phenomena more specifically. This would help people to balance between CMC and FtF social activities. For example, it is hard to find the appropriate laws that promote healthy use of Internet. Enforcement of these laws made based on the findings from the experiments and theories would be one of the ways to have less unfortunate happenings online. It would be also educational to discuss about various features of Internet that are addictive and suggestions to overcome this addictive use of the Internet in the class.

*Bonus* The Fertile Web :: Looking Outward Looking In

The progression of the Internet, I believe, operates along a dialectic of integration and creation. The internet will continue to progress, insofar that it will become more integrated with our lives—our physical and mental condition—while still innovating through new platforms and applications (with an emphasis on streaming media and interconnected personal networks).

Therefore, the theories and phenomena discussed in Comm 245 will continue to hold if they incorporate the novel features of the internet within mature psycho-social theoretical frameworks.

One of the cornerstone theories we discussed, Walther’s Hyperpersonal Model, rests upon five assumptions or tenets that I expect to persist, though with diminished intensity. For example, I predict that the over-attribution process will lead to less strong or willful impressions in one-on-one CMC. I predict this based upon the process’ assumption that a participant (source) makes reaching generalizations about another participant (target) based upon limited information, and upon modality switching, realize that these assumptions are far exaggerated. As we feel increasingly comfortable in our online skins---virtual personas complete with a myriad of textual and pictorial signs (and possible vocal or filmic)---I believe the appeal of anonymity will decline and our savvy in CMC will lead us to be more reserved and better informed to form opinions. I expect my predictions redound through other elements of the Hyperpersonal Model (self-selective presentation, et al), SIDE, the Proteus Effect, and other theories that predict distinctiveness based upon a users’ ability to alter or react to their own avatar or virtual presence online. These theories will remain, but they'll lose some of the strength that once distinguished them from similar FtF-based theories wi (i.e., as we are more familiar with virtuality and our online space, CMC and FtF interactions will differ by a lessening margin).

The core elements of SIP, development over time, stand in tact, although the time in which someone may form a rounded impression of someone may diminish as programs like Facebook, LastFM, Amazon, Flickr, et al, are linked to create an interconnected online persona. As mimicked by the truth-or-fiction balance of online personals/dating sites (as described by Gibbs et al), our everyday offline and online personas are increasingly becoming intertwined so that internet users have more incentive for “self-disclosure” (be it through linking their LastFm profile, or through revealing textual chats). In Gibbs et al, honesty was not the highest correlation with perceived “self-presentational success," yet, here, I would predict that honesty will increase over the time we craft our online persona. Little white lies will always exist, but honesty will have increased benefit, especially as deception detection ability is heightened due to an enhanced ability to pull together audio/visual/textual cues.

I must note, that in my predictions I make an assumption, one in which the more informed Larry Lessig would be hesitant to make: we will feel more secure online. We certainly have more locks and passcodes to deal with on the internet, e.g. PayPal, but diminished privacy, spam, and identity theft remain vital web/technological issues which are potentially crippling to the progress of the internet and to the closure of the gap between our CMC and FtF persona. Undoubtedly, it's a major issue!

But beyond psychological, personal, and dyadic issues, I find that the new sociological developments on the internet—its open-source and collaborative nature—are the most intriguing and exciting developments harking the future of the internet. In the macro-realm, where anonymity is still prime, new work needs to be done and old theories need to be re-worked in accommodation. Questions we need to ask:

Why do people tirelessly patch-up open-source code or bother marking-up Wikipedia articles for their “lack of citations”? Is all of this cooperation and collaboration online a form of altruism, or just another arena for people to get their 15 minutes?

I hope that in future classes, Comm 245 will address the surprising macro-phenomena of the internet: how the structure sees the individual, and how the structure might supplant or complement corporate and other non-virtual institutions.

Thanks for reading!

Optional Post - the future

The internet and various technologies associated with it, change and update at a rapid pace. Perhaps for the first time, parents find themselves learning about new technologies from there elementary school children. As a member of this technological revolution and having grown up with it, we are up-to-date and constantly evolving as the technology does. However, our parents and grandparents are moving at a slower pace. It was only several years ago, that my mother first grasped the idea of email, she sent her first text message about 6 months ago, and she signs onto ‘gchat’ as of last week. The future will contain a world of experts entirely immersed and active in the internets rapid changes. As a result, some of the theories will be altered while others will stand the test of time.

The Hyperpersonal model, I believe, will prove to be valid throughout the drastic changes of the internet. Regardless of what incredible innovations arise, people will always over attribute certain traits, selectively self-present themselves, and behave the way they are portrayed. Secondly, I don’t believe the fundamental attribution error will likely change. This error extends beyond the scope of just internet usage. People will always assume that others negative behavior reflects their personal traits while our own negative behavior reflects the situation or situational setting.

As for some theories that will change, certainly PIU or problematic internet usage will increase. As the internet changes, people will likely rely more and more on its services. This will drastically increase the amount of people who suffer from problematic internet usage. In fact, perhaps it will become so wide spread, that it becomes the norm. Another theory to likely change is SIP. This theory states that sharing information takes longer in CMC because of the lack of cues. As the internet becomes more wide spread, people will become more accustomed to using it. Cues will be easier to translate and interpret in CMC. Additionally, ways to incorporate more cues will be introduced. For example, the use of webcams and free internet phone services such as Skype have drastically increased in recent years. These will all make sharing information happen at a faster pace.

Along those lines, I believe webcams and Skype, and there respective technologies, are increasing drastically. In the future, there will likely be much discussion and research about these internet phenomenons. For example, does Skype differ from a normal phone conversation? How different is a webcam conversation compared to a regular phone call?

COMM 245 did a great job of covering a huge scope of the internet. I was introduced to parts of the web that I didn’t know exist. If I had to pick one aspect of the changing internet to be discussed in greater depth, I would say to discuss the incredible unity that can occur on the internet. This can be examined in regard to the chain emails, famous videos, websites, and people.

Well, I never thought I’d have my own blog, but here I am. What a great semester assignment!
Scott

Bonus Assignment

I understand this assignment is a little late, however I ran into a problem, which was that my invite to the blog had expired which lead me to believe I no longer could post to the blog... To my surprise I can! :)

I feel as if although the Internet and the way we use it to communicate is changing increasingly fast I feel as if most of the theories we discussed in class with continue to explain how we act as we do in social situation online. For now the most advanced form of communication I know of on the Internet is video chat with voice, which I do on a daily basis. I feel as if the theories we have talked about in class still do there job explaining why we might do the things we do while in a CMC environment. However I do feel as if with further advances they may need to be re-evaluated or performed in a more advanced environment in order to present us with the most up to date and information available. Just like any other thing with time it needs to be edited and changed and re-tested in order to perform to the current days standards.

I feel as if perhaps the only theory that will become obsolete is Wallace theories of the internet today. I honestly don't feel as if her theory about less social support ect. really support the current state of CMC communication as she describes it.

I find when meeting new people when video/voice chatting theories such as the hyper personal model still play a huge role in getting to know someone in a CMC environment. For example if you read my last blog post about my "newest coolest fiend" I first met my new friend on a video/voice chat and then moved into mostly just txt, then phone calls, then ftf, and I referred to Walthers hyper personal model to describe my experience.

As for what the class missed I really feel as if the only thing would be video/voice communication online. I feel as if websites like myspace and youtube that support your videos you post online are a huge part of the growing CMC communication of the future and I wished we had looked at them a little more. I know that video chat and voice chat has been around for quite a while now as well but I feel like we really didn't cover as much about it as we should have.

Bonus: The Future of the Psychology of Computing

Despite the Internet’s ongoing renovations due to new technological strides, I think that the majority of the theories discussed in class will last. They may serve as benchmark theories for other future experiments or they may actually be applicable to some Internet situations. However, some key theories that are already being “pushed aside” may be theories relevant to impression formation. For example, Walther’s (1993) Social Information Processing Theory projects that impression formation will develop more slowly in CMC. Contemporary social networks like Facebook ad MySpace have already begun to steer away from this theory because of the ability to upload pictures. However, this theory may stick around because we may see it applied to other mediated media, like text messaging. Walther(1996) later describe the Hyperpersonal Model, which I found to be one of the most applicable theories we discussed. I find that the five points that Walther discusses in this model, the over-attribution process, the developmental aspect, selective self-presentation, re-allocation of cognitive resources, and behavioral confirmation, are pertinent in even the contemporary forms of social interaction. I think ongoing forms of social interaction through the Internet will increasingly grow in synchronicity and richness, which may lead to more application of this model. Also, companies and politicians on the Internet may use this model advantageously as it gains more support in the future. For example, advertisers may use this theoretical approach to manipulate their audience’s impressions of their company.

Other models and theories discussed in class, like SIDE (Spears & Lea 1990), the Feature Based Model of Deception (Hancock et al. 2004) will likely still exist and like the Hyperpersonal Model may even be applicable to future technological advancements on the Internet. For example, the Feature Based Model of Deception discusses multiple forms of media such as e-mail and Instant Messaging that are used for various types of deception. We may see that it can be applied to deception in media like video chatting, or networks like Facebook.



As some of these more rich and synchronous technologies that were previously discussed become more accessible they may give rise to more issues. Already we see people committing suicide over an “online relationship” or we have read stories about “online stalkers” as this media advances. Therefore, we can expect more legal issues and future legal restrictions to form in hopes of mediating the computer-mediated environment. If there were one thing that this class failed to cover that it should have already, it would probably be asynchronous (YouTube) and synchronous video chatting.



I feel like this may be the future of interaction on the net will go in the direction of video chatting and we will most likely see this form taking on new applications and it may be used in new environments (such as the recent Democratic debate where YouTubers we asking questions to the candidates) I feel like this field will grow in terms of respectability and applicability as more of the world moves in the direction of the Internet. Great class and useful info!!!!!!

Disappearance of the fTf interaction- Assignment #9

Prior to our entrance into the new millenium our society was heavily concerned with the possible breakdown of the internet and failure of computer systems. If we look into the past we can realize that even in the early 90s our lives were not nearly as dependent on technology. We have gone from a culture where we converse solely through face-to-face interaction and revert to paper mail and telephones as alternate forms of communication. Nowadays it has become our priority to use e-mail, instant-messaging, and telephones ( mostly for text-messaging purposes) to communicated with one another. I have talked with many people in the business industries who have told me that they have started using instant-messaging throughout the company to communicate with fellow employees. The reasoning behind this being that it could cut time and costs by outsourcing work across seas and allowing people to work from home. Time is cut when schedules don't have to be made to be in a certain place at a certain time for a meeting; with video technology and IMs companies are able to have virtual conferences. With outsourcing, companies can higher employees who accept lower wages and can work at times when the company is sleeping in America, therefore making the company a 24/7 operation.
The main idea that I think will become a strong representative of CMC environments and virtual interaction as we move on is that people will loose the ability to communicate affectively face to face and relationships will not be as strong for lack of cues (Cues Filtered Our Theory). Similarly, SIDE theory will continue to show face (no pun intended) in CMC environments as more people become reliant on these sources as their primary forms of communication thereby relying on the overattributions they form about those with whom they converse.
While it is clear that many theories will hold fast to the happenings in the future I believe that we need to look even more directly at the lack of ability that humans have to interact face to face. I think that the more people interact online the less they will in person. Factors we have discussed that will influence humans to act this way is the 24/7ness of CMC environments, the ability to self-present, the ease of being honest. When I mention ease of honesty it is interesting to discuss the pros and cons: Is being honest always good? Will this cause relationships to be weaker? People to be less polite? Could this possibly strengthen relationships because we are more straightforward online so we will express our feelings more readily? Additionally should we see the 24/7ness of online communities as a positive or negative? Is is negative because this enables people to avoid further human interaction and any other'real life' activities for that matter? or is it Postive because it allows people from all over the world to converse and thus broadens our scope of society? These are issues we must look at when we look at the future of technology and communication in CMC.
In COMM245 it would be extremely interested to discuss the issues I have mentioned above. I believe that we missed looking at more of the psychological aspects of what reliance on CMC for communication does to our everyday face-to-face relationships. Yes, we did discuss how they are different but not really how they affect one another ( at least not on a deep detailed enough level). It would be interesting to discuss whether or not society could function without human face-to-face interaction at all and what they would mean. It seems that part of Ramirez and Wang's points on the different outcomes when you meet fTf in the short term vs long term after using CMC hold true. It makes sense that the longer you get to know someone online the greater the development of your picture of them and the less room you leave for alterations of the mental picture. Adding to this we can see elements of SIP, the idea of time. SIP differs from CFO in that it says you can develop a clear idea of who the person is, it just takes time however we have yet to look at this in totality. Yes, overtime we gain more information about the individual but is this really the case. Has anyone ever wondered whether time just allows us more opportunity to develop our own perception of the person not really who the actual individual is? This might be an area that COMM245 could explore.

What does the future hold for the Psychology Of Social Computing?

We covered an extensive amount of theories over the course of this semester, and this blog is interesting because it lets us delve into which theories actually mattered for our lifetime and which theories we could've just zoned out on during lecture. The internet has always been expanding, and unforunately some of the theories that we covered in class just willn ot be relevant when talking about the internet any longer. I feel like the internet is making a move toward solely having live chats with video, and being able to see the person you are IMing is very near.
In other words, communication online without knowing what the other person looks like will be a thing of the past. Now what does that mean for some of the theories we covered in class? For one thing, impression formation will practically become obsolete. We will be able to visually see someone, thus there is no need to form impressions, other than that of personality traits, which will be much easier to gather with visual communication. Because of visual cues becoming available, Social Information Processing theory is sure to become a thing of the past. I think is it accurate to say, and this came as shock to me, that most theories that were covered in class will stick around for some time.
Theories such as O'Sullivan Model and SIDE will all be around throughout our lifetime. Concerning the first theory, it has to do with valence and locus. This means, is the information you are expressing positive or negative and is it about yourself or someone esle. I will always call my parents if I recieved a bad grade, a bad report at work, or God forbid, a call from the police station. However, if I get a promotion or inform them they are soon to be grandparents, I would love to tell them that face-to-face. As for SIDE, even if the internet turns to live video chats, which I think it will, people will still feel the need to group the person they are communicating with into a social category, i.e. she's a prep, he's a goth.
One thing I believe will come a thing of the past in our lifetime is the telephone. Maybe not the cell phone, but a live conversation without visual contact. I believe that will be a thing of the past. Soon IMing will have the ability to not only see what they are writing, but also to see what they are wearing. Instead of dialing a number in on the house phone, there will be live chats with video in between friends and families. Basically what a video chat is now, except it will be used to express all types of information, whether it be about asking for a cup of sugar or wondering when the book club is meeting.
I didn't know what to write about something we didn't cover, but now that I took a glance at what the others had to say, I really would've loved to hear what you had to say about pornography. With the diversity and personality of the class, I think pornography would have been very interesting and at the very least fun.