My long-distance relationship experience can be described with some of Wallace's attraction factors. One such factor, common ground played a huge part in our CMC interactions. Throughout the summer we found a long list of common beliefs assumptions, and attitudes, such as our similar religious, social, and political thoughts. Wallace states that we are attracted to people we share common ground with.
I believe Wallace's disinhibition attraction factor, which deals with increased self-disclousure and sharing, was the most important part of our relationship forming in CMC. Once we moved the bulk of our relationship online, I remember noticing how much closer we were getting. We would talk on aim every night, picking up where we left off the day before. When he shared a personal story, I would share a similar one with him. It was almost like bartering, story for story, telling each other things we probably wouldn't tell anyone in any sort of rich medium. Undoubtedly, some of these intense feelings can be due to aspects of the hyperpersonal model, which suggests that I could have over-attributed my boyfriends personality based on what he was selectively presenting to me online.
Making the transition from mostly CMC communication back to mostly FtF communication was not seamless. Seeing him face to face felt a little weird at first, remembering things I told him online that I wouldn't have shared face to face. Also, we disagree more than we ever did through CMC communication where we rarely disagreed. One thing that seemed to carry over from our CMC communication is a high degree of openness and self-disclousure, that I don't think would have happened had we spent the summer together.
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-5-option-1_5305.html
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-5-option-1_1468.html
5 comments:
i think thats so interesting, and i can completely relate to being more open online, and experiencing someone else who responds to that openness via CMC. Thats great that your relationship was able to sustain the distance, and it seems like it even flourished in that distance. That seems really awesome. Your relationship seems to truly epitomize the theory that on CMC, self-disclosure begets self-disclosure. Since at first, being apart probably seemed like it would be a disadvantage, thats pretty cool that it turned out to work in developing the relationship. I kind of wonder if the relationship would have progressed at the same rate if you hadnt had to communicate in a mediated environment. Its so ironic that there is a possibility the element of being face to face would have slowed down a relationship. technology makes things so complicated!
Caslynn,
You do a nice job of directly introducing your topic and a theory relating to your situation. The Impression Management Model is a very appropriate model to discuss as your story portrays the type of relationship that would require CMC in order to maintain substance.
A few thoughts: explaining a specific term such as ‘common ground’ would benefit readers outside of Comm 245 because they may not be as familiar with Wallace’s theories as we are. You do a nice job of explaining disinhibition, and go into more detail than common ground; your statements were clearer when you went into more detail.
Overall, your post is well written and describes the situation well. Explaining how FtF differed from other CMC experiences was a nice touch. I enjoyed reading your post and hope to read more in the future.
I really enjoyed reading your account of forming a relationship with your boyfriend online. I completely agree with your claim that disinhibition is directly correlated with an increase in self-disclosure and sharing. I can recall many instances where I have felt more comfortable diverging personal information via Computer Mediated Communication rather than Face-to-Face. I wonder, however, whether or not this disinhibition effect is more applicable to people of our generation. Our generation is unique in that we have grown up with the internet, and have seen and experienced all of the major milestones that the internet has achieve in the past decade or two (ie. Email, instant messaging, Facebook, etc.). This makes me wonder if such disinhibition effects would apply similarly to older generations of people attempting to form relationships online. For individuals who can remember back to a time when CMC was not an option in relationship building, CMC might not be as disinhibiting. I think that this question is something that would be interesting to study in the future.
Great post!
I also wrote about my long distance relationship, which has lasted over 2 years. I definitely agree that the increased self-disclosure is the biggest reason why LDR can work. My boyfriend and I do the same thing--drop off and pick up the conversation. We share a lot because the other person is not there physcially to experience it. LDRs force you to bond quickly because you must express yourself through communication instead of relying on physical cues or shared experiences. I also feel awkward when I see my boyfriend Ftf after so long with CMC. It's hard to make the adjustment and the conversation is always awkward at first.
I completely relate that one becomes more open in a CMC environment, more so than in a ftf environment. Although it does give the other party and yourself more room for self-presentation, I think this is true only in the beginning. I feel that a continuous chat via a computer mediated environment makes both parties disclose personal information more so. It's as Christina Caiozzo says, "self disclosure begets self disclosure."
I guess for some time communication through cmc is great and worth while, but I still do not feel that it replaces the ftf component of a relationship. Technology can only do so much.
Post a Comment