I just logged on, eager to post an inadvertently potent example of Impression Management Model from my weekend--- only to find that it was already written! The last poster literally told my story, and I only guess it proves (thankfully?) that I did not choose an unusual path. I too had an argument with my girlfriend (albeit an ex), the size of which was epic. Never have I argued so accusingly and bitterly about anything in my life. In light of O'Sullivan's model, it fits that I was capable of being so accusatory in person because the locus was her, and the valence was negative- and the model accurately proposed that I would be less likely to choose a mediated interaction. If Media Richness Theory were correct, I would have chosen to follow this interaction with a similarly unequivocal and cue-rich channel of communication. But the admissions I wanted to make were going to be hard ones, and I wanted the distance and time to think that a Facebook message could provide. Now that I was the locus, and the valence was negative, I found myself writing the sincerest confession of wrongdoing that I was capable of portraying. I was hiding behind the leanness provided by this channel of communication because choosing the Facebook message provided a buffer against direct negative reactions while simultaneously implying things that even the cues and gestures of a face to face interaction might not be able to imply.
In a different interaction with a friend from home, I found further support for the Impression Management Model. He sent me a song that he had been working on through e-mail and I thought he did a great job producing it. I did not even consider replying to his e-mail and instead found myself calling his cell-phone to tell him how well I thought the beat was coming along. O'Sullivan's model clearly explains my preference through the evidence that a positive valence, and an "other" locus prove extremely conducive to less mediated forms of communication (m =1.84). I wanted to use a richer medium to show sincerity and make all the cues of that sincerity available, despite the inability to communicate face to face.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Hey Brian,
Sorry about taking the same topic as you. I guess it goes to show that this is a scenario that happens quite frequently. Our examples also put nails in the Cues Filtered Out theory. According to CFO, it would be preposterous that we would select a leaner medium and expect to have a better communication. The whole “thinking things out” idea of a facebook message also is an excellent example of re-allocation of cognitive resources hypothesis from the hyperpersonal model. The simplified communication that is a facebook message allows one to devote more time and mental energy to developing a well thought out apology and not have to worry about all the non-verbal cues associated with face to face communication.
Post a Comment