Assignment 5, Option 1

A few years back I was involved in a long distance relationship with a girl who lived about three hours away. We had met through our parents (our moms had both gone to Cornell) on several occasions and eventually exchanged AIM screen names, so that we’d be able to keep in touch with each other more frequently than twice a year. Let’s call her S.
S and I used computer mediated communication vastly more often than we got a chance to see each other face-to-face, and this doubtless influenced our relationship heavily. When we first started talking via AIM, we were practically strangers, but before long we were confiding in one another as if we’d been friends for years. Wallace considers disinhibition to be one of the four primary factors in determining attraction through CMC. Disinhibition here refers to the progressively escalating self-disclosure inherent to developing relationships: as S and I talked more and more, we became more comfortable – less inhibited – around each other, and I am positive that this was a strong factor that led to our eventually dating.
Wallace’s other three factors are physical attractiveness, common ground, and proximity. The general CMC rule of physical attractiveness is that, in contrast to FtF interaction, people generally get to know each other online before they find out what these people look like, giving people a chance to form positive impressions of people they otherwise might have dismissed upon seeing them; but this did not apply to my situation, since S and I had met face-to-face a few times before ever talking through a computer, and also because she was certainly not unattractive.
Proximity refers to the phenomenon whereby people one encounters or interacts with frequently are generally looked upon more favorably. S and I did talk often, and I am fairly certain that the frequency of our interactions was integral in leading to our eventual mutual disinhibition.
Common ground speaks for itself, and indeed, S and I had plenty. In addition to knowing each other through our families, we found that we had extraordinarily much in common, in terms of interests, hobbies, and taste in books and movies. Again, this factor – along with proximity and disinhibition – was in all likelihood a major contributer to the fact that S and I started dating.
I find Wallace’s attraction factors to be an interesting way of looking at the formation of Internet relationships. It seems almost too easy to attribute something as complex as romantic feelings to four main phenomena, but as evidenced from my own example, the list is in actuality surprisingly comprehensive. I would be interested to see how many relationships fostered by the Internet can claim to have begun due to other circumstances.

Comments: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=2774598650119543771&postID=8206651792988022582
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=2774598650119543771&postID=6547054256472270834