Over the weekend I decided on a synchronous online chat room as the psychological space where I would interact with and observe another person. It was surprising how nervous I was as I entered a chat room from a Meebo, an instant messaging website. Being nervous I created a fake persona and I became Kelly, a 20 year old Communications major from
I found it interesting the effects that a nickname had on the number of conversations people started with me. Both cutechipmunk and friendlycactus yielded in zero conversations, while kittykat besieged me in private messages from guys looking for more than just a nice conversation. I settled on kitkat, an actual nickname of mine, and got the response I was looking for, people chatting with me in an almost everyday manner.
I ended many conversations before engaging with Guest2386 who privately messaged me and introduced himself as Mark, a 23 year old Australian graduate student in Business. Hearing he was from
While I can’t say that I made a precise impression, I did make mental notes on Mark’s behaviors and how they related to the “Big Five” traits. Firstly I would say that Mark is more introverted than extraverted because while we were both in the same chat room I didn’t even notice him until he privately messaged me and he also depended on me to continue the conversation. From this I decided that he’s shy and socially awkward and thus prefers spending time alone, but it might be that based on available cues I am exaggerating his introversion
From our conversation I came to think that Mark is agreeable and seemed like a genuinely decent and honest person; he listened to what I had to say, positively responded, and was never negative towards my views. Mark also seemed to be slightly neurotic. I noticed that he tended to be emotional in his responses, his messages would often become intense and anxiety-filled, and he acted like I was abandoning him or losing interest when I didn’t immediately respond to something he said.
While I communicated and to some extent got to know Mark, I believe that I didn’t have enough interaction and information about his character to really decide how open or conscientious he is. He displayed behavior that could be described as more or less open and also more or less conscientious. But on the whole Mark seemed like a warm person and one whom I enjoyed talking to.
2 comments:
Lauren,
I think you made a good point in the beginning when you talked about how people were more or less responsive depending on what nickname you chose. Immediately, this strikes me as supporting the Hyperpersonal Theory. With a nickname like kittykat, you exude a sexual vibe, which leads people to form intense, exaggerated impressions of your persona. However, a more neutral name like kitkat does not elicit nearly the same reaction. I think it is remarkable how sensitive people are to nicknames and how the slightest hint of suggestiveness can change how people interact with you altogether.
I agree with your analysis of the conversation because it seems like the intensity of the impressions were stronger than the breadth of information that you gathered. If you continued talking to Mark, I’m sure you would solidify your impressions and be able to rate him more accurately on the Big Five characteristics, which supports social information processing theory. I noticed that you rated Mark on neuroticism, extraversion, and agreeableness, which are primarily visual personality characteristics. Generally these are harder to judge in a CMC environment, but again, this supports Hyperpersonal theory because your ratings are likely overstated. Overall, I thought your post was well organized and thoughtful.
Hi you!
I must say your post stood out to me because I had a very similar experience to yours while going out and doing this assignment. I too tested a variety of different names, as well as chat rooms, until I found a subject who did not bombard me with inappropriate or border line disgusting comments or questions. Like you, I found it fascinating to see how different people responded to the different names I used, as well as how hard it was to find someone who was in this synchronous chat room simply looking to have an intelligent and casual conversation with me. I think your analysis of your impressions were right on, as it seems that the Hyperpersonal theory, especially the over attribution process, had a major role in your impression formation. Based on the SIP theory, I would be interested in seeing how your impressions would solidify or change as you acquired more cues if you continued talked to Mark. Do you think you will keep in touch with him? Great work and I look forward to reading more!
Post a Comment