My boyfriend and I have been dealing with the notorious LDR for over two years. While I have never really considered us part of the 17 million people who date online annually, due to physical distance, our relationship is mostly CMC. We talk multiple times during the day on the phone, text message, AIM, and webcam. I think the CFO theory has some merit because whenever we argue over these mediums, it’s quickly exaggerated because of lack of cues. If we are disagreeing, inability to see facial cues or hear tones causes us to view the other person negatively. You assume the other person is being sarcastic or mean if the conversation is in disagreement. So with this negative influence, how do we make it work?
Wallace’s idea of common ground plays a smaller role in our mutual attraction because of our Ftf relationship prior to CMC. Wallace suggests sharing ideas and beliefs increases the attraction to another person, and that this is exaggerated in CMC because of selective self-disclosure, increase private self-awareness, and decreased public self-awareness. The Law of Attraction, which states the proportion of common ground based on interaction rather than the quantity is key, still applies to us. Given our communication techniques, the amount of information to be exchanged is limited. We cannot say everything possible in a text or IM message so, in a way, we present selective information. It’s natural that we will focus on things the other person can relate to, such as sharing similar experiences. For example, if he were to tell me about something that made him angry that day, I’d respond with support and agreement. We might think we have a large proportion of things in common, when in fact if we were in a Ftf relationship, this would be untrue.
We might not share common ground as much in Ftf where more information would be shared, which is explained by McKenna’s identifiably factor. McKenna suggests that identifying with someone increases attraction. This ability to identify is aided by visual anonymity, which increases self-disclosure—since we have to get to know each other through lean mediums, we put more effort into bonding and expression. We don’t have the option of spending time Ftf and observing the other person. We need to tell each other things about ourselves in order to get to know one another better and are able to do so across space and time. I don’t have to wait until I see him, I can send him a text or email at any time. If I were with him and upset, I might expect him to read my body language and understand my emotions. In CMC, I am forced to display interactional control and vocalize all feelings if I want him to know something I feel. This allows us to identify with each other, which has definitely played a role in our attraction.
comments:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=2774598650119543771&postID=6547054256472270834
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=2774598650119543771&postID=5135641610536412735
4 comments:
Linda,
I really enjoyed this post. You used great examples from your personal relationship to demonstrate several appropriate theories and concepts.
Your analysis of CFO was of most interest to me. I have had many problems communicating with my significant other via CMC. I get frustrated easily, because with so few cues, I constantly think he is angry or upset. I tend to search for missing cues within each sent message. I always want more than I have in the text to better understand each conversation.
Throughout your blog you wrote in a very clear manner. I was able to follow along, and coincidentally, relate easily to each of your points. The way in which aspects of your relationship support CFO made it evident that aspects of mine do too. Overall, very nice job.
Linda,
Your post was extremely interesting and I completely agree with all of your points. In regards to your introduction, I had an experience this past week where lacks of cues due to CMC lead to a miscommunication that quickly escalated into an intense fight. It is interesting how you connected the negativity that comes with CFO theory and the positive self-disclosure associated with McKenna’s theory. The information we choose to share with another person in a CMC setting can be crucial to forming and maintaining a relationship. Although self-disclosure strengthens and builds upon a relationship, some self-disclosure can be harmful, as seen in your introduction. Great post!
I found it very interesting that you used the theories discussed in class in a negative light. We discuss how CMC allows one to share personal feelings easier than FtF, therefore making communication online a positive experience for most.
I liked how you looked at the Internet as a hindrance to your relationship rather than an amplifier. While reading, I thought back to times when I had arguments online with friends. I now notice how fast they turned into bigger ordeals than necessary, and only now do I realize that it was caused by lack of non-verbal cues. You were very through in your explanation of all aspects of Wallace’s factors.
You were able to prove your point by showing how presenting selective information, limited exchange of information, and lack of non-verbal cues can all lead to a detrimental situation. Great job!
Linda,
I found your post interesting because you talked about how your negative CFO experience in the CMC medium was subdued by Wallace’s attraction factors, primarily the proximity factor. It is true according to the CFO theory that your views about each other would get quickly exaggerated because of the lack of cues over CMC; however, through proximity, you showed how long distance relationships do work best by utilizing CMC as much as possible to create a sense of closeness that you would normally get if you were physically close or at least nearby to that person. It was also interesting to hear how your relationship transitioned from one focused primarily in the FtF medium to the CMC medium; in addition, it was interesting how proximity played a big role in facilitating the continued attraction, when common ground did not play as big of a role since you already knew a lot about each other prior to your CMC interactions. Great post!
Post a Comment