When the idea of media richness theory was presented in class, it certainly seemed reasonable. I certainly text people when my subject is straightforward, and call or meet in person for more complex tasks. My experiences did reflect some thought as to the richness of the communication, but that did not appear to be the only factor in my decision, as Media Richness Theory suggests. While equivocality was one factor in determining the richness of the communication medium, there were other human factors that had to be taken into account when choosing a communication medium.
The first instance where I reflected on my choice of communication media was contacting people to coordinate working on a problem set. This problem set is a weekly assignment that has already become known as incredibly time consuming. I knew that most of my friends would be less than enthusiastic about beginning so early in the week. For this instance I chose to call each individual person that I usually work with. This took longer than sending out a mass text message, as calling five people individually is not efficient. Media Richness Theory says I should have sent that text message since I was just scheduling a meeting, but my experience has told me that people are much less likely to respond to texts. By calling, I am confronting people who don't know the purpose of my call when they answer. The task I desired to perform was unambiguous; it was to set a time and place to meet, and even this should have been simple since we always work at the same location on campus. In this case I chose a richer medium than Media Richness Theory suggests because I am familiar with how other people use text messaging, and was aware that it would be less effective.
In another instance, my choice of media was more supportive of Media Richness Theory. I had been in a conflict with a close friend of mine, and we hadn't talked in a few days. I decided to reconcile with her face to face, for many of the reasons that Media Richness Theory suggests. I wanted to gage my friend's reaction, as well as communicate in a way that was decidedly equivocal. In this case, Media Richness Theory accurately assumes that my desire for more cues will drive me to use a richer medium. In this case I'm confident that the richer medium was the right choice, because there are feedback elements and nonverbal cues that I felt were important to my communication. When the topic of a conversation is a serious matter involving personal issues, face to face conversations offer more cues to determine how genuine a person is, making it the better option.
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-3-my-confessions.html
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-3-selecting-media.html
1 comment:
Michael,
I like your point about how situations are not always black and white, and how outside factors influence our communication decisions. Even though a text message may have been more efficient for your unequivocal message, as Media Richness Theory postulates, your past experience with arranging these study groups dictated your choice of media. People modify their actions based on how others best respond, and will therefore chose the media source that helps them best attain their goal. I think you illustrated this point very well.
As for your other experience, I agree with your application of Media Richness Theory. Others in your situation may have chosen a mediated form of communication since the locus was self and the valence was negative, which would support O’Sullivan’s Model. Personally, I would have acted like you did to confront the problem. Face to face communication is definitely the most efficient and the most compassionate way to resolve a conflict. Overall, your post was very thoughtful and well-written.
-Lindsay
Post a Comment