A8 (Group). I've Got A Feeling. I Feel It :: alt.support.ocd

by: Andrew C. Meehan (Green), Brian Isett (Brown), Robert Jerry (Red)

Self-help and social support groups—like many socially-focused practices—have found a home on the “boards” and forums of the internet. Braithwaite, et al, examined the integration of social support groups into the internet medium to observe how this “permanent fixture in American culture” had adapted itself to the CMC environment (Braithwaite, 1999). The research team coded over 1,400 support messages according to five social support supratypes, outlined by Cutrona and Suhr (1992). The original supratypes’ sub-categories were slightly modified by the research team to best fit their specific medium and topic of research.

In the manner of the Braithwaite study, our team of three separately coded 20 messages located in the “alt.support.ocd” forum of Usenet. The results, including the inter-rater reliability of the coders, are included below:

Figure 1

% inter-rater reliability			0.875
			frequency	% of msgs	Modified %
Information			13	0.65	34.21
Tangible assistance			0	0	0.00
Esteem support			10	0.5	26.32
Network support			10	0.5	26.32
Emotional support			5	0.25	13.16
Humor			4	0.2

(Specific threads linked at bottom)

A statistical comparison of our frequency and percent distribution with that of Braithwaite’s revealed a significant difference between the respective scoring distributions among supratypes. Our inter-rater reliability supports the nation that each coder understood the distinction between the supratypes and could code accordingly.

Analysis

Using a Chi-square test, or multinomial goodness-of-fit test, with 4 degrees of freedom—Humor was excluded because Braithwaite did not score for it—we found our P-value was less than statistically significant: 0.005 (alpha level = 0.05).

Hypotheses of Test:

Null Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between the distribution of
support messages scored by us and the distribution of support messages
scored by Braithwaite, et al, in the 5 supratypes.

Alternative Hypothesis: There is a significant difference between the distribution of
support messages scored by us and the distribution of support messages
scored by Braithwaite, et al, in the 5 supratypes.

The Null Hypothesis was rejected (P-value less than alpha level), which allows us to conclude that our distribution among the supratypes was significantly different than Braithwaite’s. Quantitatively, we attribute this to our much lower Emotional Support percentages (circa 27% lower) and higher Esteem, Network, and Information Support percentages.

The nature of the support groups coded for—Persons with Disabilities versus Persons struggling with OCD—can partially account for the discrepancy. Braithwaite denoted three “key life functions” most directly related to social support situations involving the disabled: mobility, communication, and socialization. For Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, mobility and communication may not be altered as substantially, and socialization may be the greatest barrier to overcoming an OCD. Furthermore, preventative and/or palliative support can be lent online in the case of OCD, whereas Disabilities are often permanent and CMC advice might tend to lean toward an exchange of “empathy” (Emotional Support) or peer-to-peer stories. Walther and Boyd’s attractive dimensions of online support accounts for these types of exchanges: Social Distance allows people in similar situations to empathize or emote in ways that non-disabled persons could not. Conversely, OCD sufferers rely more heavily on Information and Network Support for aid – here, the dimensions of Interaction Management and Anonymity might become as vital as Social Distance. Many messages on the alt.support.ocd board were referrals to experts’ books or admonishments for professional consultation (more tangible help is suggested).

Tangible Assistance did not factor in our or Braithwaite’s coding, due to the very reasons online support can be helpful – Social Distance and Anonymity. Posters/commenters are not likely to lend physical support to OCD or Disabled patients due to the importance of the aforementioned dimensions of online support.

Our additional supratype, Humor was not scored by Braithwaite, though we found it to be present in 1/5th of the scored messages (see Figure 1). This suggests that there may be a sixth
category that needs to be considered when examining support groups (or the replacement of Tangible Support by Humor for Online Support supratypes). It is easy to see how humor could provide palliative support in these situations; Walther and Boyd’s dimensions, as well as the Hyperpersonal Model, suggest that the freedom of conversation online might allow for a greater exchange of Humor. Inexpertness, as Walther suggests, might lead to personalized but unhelpful messages in family or friend support.

Threads:

OCD fool needs advice badly
OCD?
Mad Cow!
Relationship breakups...
Getting Engaged to an OCD woman
1.6% of us pretend
Help stamp out abuse and torture by Psychologists