In an attempt to stimulate my interest in Internet predators, I decided to go undercover as a 15-year-old female girl named Mermaid Johnson from Ithaca to speak with an older age male to see whether or not he was going to hit on me. I entered a yahoo! chat room for single males to pursue my plan. My plan eventually worked over the course of 2 days on a 30 year old male from Jersey (Mark) but don’t worry, I told him that I had a boyfriend and that my dad was a cop; he hasn’t spoken to me since.
The interesting part about the encounter is that he, rather than Mermaid initiated the conversation and after his first words “How’s it going, cutie pie,” I thought he was a jerk and therefore the expected valence of this episode was negative in the locus of other (Mark) and positive in the locus of self (Me, Saidu). Mermaid, however, thought that this guy was pretty cool and therefore, I felt his goal for the episode became setting a ground to potentially “maximize his rewards” with Mermaid. My goal, however became to maximize my reward of getting him to say sexually explicit words to me while minimizing my costs of actually developing a relationship with this man that can get me in trouble.
Since my goals were as such, I asked him questions about what he did as a career to show that I had somewhat of an interest in him. I found out that he is a personal trainer and eventually he mentioned to me that he has “huge muscles all over his body.” At this point, I knew that I had him in my grasp and my interactional strategy was to lead him on until I felt he was about to “make moves” with Mermaid. I responded with “oooooh, all over your body, eh?” He responded with “of course, honey…I can show you if you let me.” Since I am a religious watcher of Dateline NBC and have seen the “to catch a predator” series on TV and online a number of times, I knew what the next step was and I did not want to see the next step. I am referring to him sending pictures of his genitals to Mermaid and did not want to see them. Since I had already accomplished the task of this assignment, I decided to cut him loose in the following way:
Mermaid: So, are you going to send me a pic of your muscles?
Mark: u sure bet
Mermaid: oooh, I’m not sure if my dad or my boyfriend would like that
Mark: wait, u have a boyfriend? U never told me that
Mermaid: I never knew what your plans were but now that I do, I think that’s kinda creepy
Mark: Come on, you know I wouldn’t do anything like that to you
Mermaid: OK, let me talk to my dad about this to make sure…he’s a cop
(end conversation)
I will say that the space definitely affected the presentation of self since I was in a room for single males. Since I knew that this man was fairly desperate for “love,” I began to present myself as a person who wanted to be educated. Although I never stated this fact explicitly, I showed interest in him and that was enough for him to build an attraction towards me. I knew that the mediation of the synchronous chat room would make it easier for me to accomplish my goal. I felt bad doing this but this lets you know some of the sick and sadistic acts that take place in chat rooms all over the country.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
3 My Media Selection
For this assignment, I paid attention to my interactions with others and found two specific instances where I selected specific media because of the type of message I wanted to send. First, I wanted to contact an old friend from high school who I had not spoken to in several weeks. Because of our lack of recent communication, I felt there was some tension in our relationship, so I wanted to hide in the most ambiguous medium possible. Thus, I decided to “poke” her on Facebook just to start the lines of communication flowing again.
My first example supports O’Sullivan’s model in relation to locus. The locus was myself because I wanted to tell my friend about events going on in my life. Even though I wanted to hear about her life as well, I would still classify myself as the primary locus. According to Hypothesis #2 in O’Sullivan’s model, when the locus is the self, mediated communication is preferred over face-to-face or telephone calls. I would not consider the valence to be negative, but instead it was uncertain. I was not sure if the outcome would be positive or negative. O’Sullivan states users looking for a positive reaction in regards to themselves will use mediated channels just in case the response does not live up to expectations. I agree with this statement because if I had been greeted with a flat tone on the telephone, I would have been disappointed.
Second, I called my brother on the telephone, which is a fairly routine practice. Since he is at a very antisocial stage in his teenage life, I wanted to use the richest medium possible to try and obtain the most information from him. If I had been home, I would have spoken to him face-to-face, but I had to settle for the telephone as the next richest form of media.
This interaction falls under the Media Richness Theory. The task, speaking to my brother about recent developments in his life, was equivocal. I did not have a specific, straightforward message to deliver to him, thus the topic of conversation was more vague then directed. Thus, my experience followed Media Richness Theory because I chose the rich media of the telephone for an equivocal task.
My first example supports O’Sullivan’s model in relation to locus. The locus was myself because I wanted to tell my friend about events going on in my life. Even though I wanted to hear about her life as well, I would still classify myself as the primary locus. According to Hypothesis #2 in O’Sullivan’s model, when the locus is the self, mediated communication is preferred over face-to-face or telephone calls. I would not consider the valence to be negative, but instead it was uncertain. I was not sure if the outcome would be positive or negative. O’Sullivan states users looking for a positive reaction in regards to themselves will use mediated channels just in case the response does not live up to expectations. I agree with this statement because if I had been greeted with a flat tone on the telephone, I would have been disappointed.
Second, I called my brother on the telephone, which is a fairly routine practice. Since he is at a very antisocial stage in his teenage life, I wanted to use the richest medium possible to try and obtain the most information from him. If I had been home, I would have spoken to him face-to-face, but I had to settle for the telephone as the next richest form of media.
This interaction falls under the Media Richness Theory. The task, speaking to my brother about recent developments in his life, was equivocal. I did not have a specific, straightforward message to deliver to him, thus the topic of conversation was more vague then directed. Thus, my experience followed Media Richness Theory because I chose the rich media of the telephone for an equivocal task.
3: Efficiency and Clarity
One instance of media selection is when I chose to text message my friends rather than call them on the phone. I decided to run up to Pyramid Mall for errands and since I knew that most of my friends don’t have cars I wanted to see if any of them wanted to tag along. Because I didn’t want to waste time getting to the mall, which would occur if I called my friends due to what I want to call ‘social politeness’ (“How are you?”, “How’s your day?”), I decided to use text messages. Rather than getting caught up in conversations with each person I merely sent out a quick message asking if they wanted to go to the mall with me and telling them when I would be leaving.
I made my media selection based on my concern about efficiency and because of this the Media Richness Theory supports my decision. The Media Richness Theory is about finding the “optimal match between equivocality of a communication task and the richness of the medium” (Lecture, 9/6/07). Based on this you would for example choose a lean media for a task that is less equivocal. Basically, the Media Richness Theory portrays the idea that people make our media choices all about efficiency. This is true in my example. I chose to text message, a media with fewer cues, because in my situation fewer cues were more optimal. Because I based my decision on efficiency and not clarity or ambiguity the Impression Management Model does not support my selection.
Another example of media selection is when I used the telephone to ask my parents to ship me things like clothes and school supplies that I had forgotten at home. Because I didn’t want there to be any confusion as to what I wanted or for them to have trouble finding everything I decided to call them on the telephone. The telephone is considered to be a rich channel and or a medium with more cues available than say email. I wanted these extra cues to make sure that I was very clear about my wants and directions.
While sending an email would have been more efficient than using the telephone, I decided that clarity was more important than efficiency. My decision is supported by the Impression Management Model. In this model O’Sullivan states that people may want to be clear sometimes and ambiguous at other times, and they might not necessarily care about efficiency. People also choose their medium based on its richness and how it would affect their clarity or ambiguity. In my case I settled on using the telephone because it is a richer medium and would increase my clarity. Because my media selection wasn’t based on efficiency the Media Richness Theory does not support my choice.
Comments:
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-3-my-confessions.html
Assignment 3: Option 1: As an old lady...
Because of such a positive response from last weeks post, I decided to stick to the college confidential forum. However, this time, I was not merely a college student, but rather I pretended to be a 50 year old lady. It sounds pretty bizarre- I mean you have a lady of 50 amidst a discussion board dominated by 15-16 year olds. But regardless, it was very interesting. My initial impressions of most of the students on the forum were that they were too full of themselves. Subjects as “Chancemeplzzzzzz...Chances for Harvard? I faill” followed by nearly perfect stats and an abundance of extracurricular activities validated my impressions. Furthermore, after reading the following post, I stopped to think whether societal pressures are stripping us of our youth.
Harvard Discussion Forum
Subject: I don't know wat to do
Hey guys,
I have just started my freshman year in HS and I am Super Uber stressed out about what classes I should take.
I dropped PE for martial arts. I am doing Honors English, Honors Global Studies, Honors Geometry, pretty much all honors for freshman.
I am doing Debate because someone told me schools on the east like debate alot, like harvard.
I am also taking Biology, because it was a recommended course for students hoping to get into a competitive school.
I will join the Golf team, and possibly the tennis and baseball team.
I may join the Civics club, and I am a part of the club Interact. Interact does volunteer work all over the city.
I volunteer at my local library for hours.
I took the SAT II as an 8th grader, because I am part of a special program called John Hopkins Talent search, and scored a 1300, which is horrible.
I really need to know pretty much EXACTLY what I have to do.
After reading the post, my initial response was “chill out kid!” All the activities the child is involved with are those that are mandated by society. There is no clear formula to get into Harvard. On the topic of colleges, why Harvard for that matter? The child is in 8th grade, he just graduated JHS, and Harvard is probably the only good school he has heard of. There are tons of other great schools out there, those of which may be a far better match for him/her. Furthermore, doing X because he said, and doing y because she said just to get to point z is bizarre! Whatever happened to, taking part in something you have an utter interest in? At the end of the day, those who absolutely love what they do are most successful at it.
After reading many stats driven posts, I decided to impart some advice as a 50 year old woman. Managing my impression was quite a challenge. I was this 50 year old woman who was trying to impart advice to 16 year olds who saw only HPS (the shorthand form used on collegeconfidential for Harvard,
Now let’s look at the college confidential space in relation to Goffman and Jung’s notion of “possible selves.”
- Ideal self- contains the qualities we strive to possess.
- Ought self- who we think we should be
- Actual self- qualities we express at present
- True self- inner-self that has not yet been fully expressed.
As a collegeconfidential student, I feel that the first three “possible selves” mask the 3rd and most important self. The first three are guided by wanting to be perfect. Perfect at this point in time for many students is HPS.
As a 50 year old woman with a husband and 3 daughers, you get to know that life’s purpose is to address the last “possible self” or true self. As someone guided by Buddhist philosophy, my inner-self hopes to attain a lasting state of happiness, that which is possible only through inner peace. Inner peace is possible through compassion. Most of our troubles are due to our desire for our own self-interests. How do we regulate these poisons? Compassion! When you have compassion for a very poor person, you are showing sympathy because he or she is poor; your compassion is based on altruistic considerations. Love towards your wife, your husband, your children, or a close friend is usually based on attachment. When your attachment changes, your kindness also changes; it may disappear. This is not true love. Real love is not based on attachment, but on altruism. This type of compassion is what we must strive to cultivate in ourselves.
That is basically what I am trying to achieve as a 50 year old, quite different from what the 16 year olds on collegeconfidential are trying to achieve. There is no question that such introspection comes with age, but regardless, this is the inner peace we all must strive for, and it begins with doing things because you are interested in them. Only then will rid yourself of the stresses society mandates upon you. From thereon, you will be able to branch outside yourself, and look to those around you. This is key!
· Self Description: As I was instant messaging the writer of the previous post, I was explaining to him what I discussed earlier. I had to be very careful, because a 16 year old at this age is very headstrong and does not want to hear philosophical fluff. Because I was a 50 year old, way beyond his time, it was essential for me to build my credibility. I said that I graduated summa cum lade from
· Social Association: I began to associate myself with some of the big names kids his age would be familiar with: Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. That definitely gave me more credibility.
After these non-verbial self-presentation tactics added to my credibility, I began my discussion on the deeper meaning to life, and the quest for the inner-self. I was careful not to paint a picture as someone dropping studies all together to pursue the meaning of life. Rather, I tied my schooling (at great institutions- college confidential students love that stuff) to my passion for what I do. This is what got the kid to think. He began to tell me of his passion, his interests, etc. I was merely guiding him to pursue and excel at them. He had a passion for drawing, so from there on, we were talking about his prospects in architecture and urban planning. We then spoke about the “real” college process, and how a applicant who does things just because he has to is transparent in his application.
Overall, this was a great experience. I was able to delve into the “possible selves” notion- from both a high school student’s perspective, and from an older, wiser person’s perspective. Furthermore, the self-presentational tactics of mainly self-description and social association definitely gave me the credibility to talk to a 16 year old about matters relevant to him, which otherwise would not have been possible.
Relating this to Sullivan’s Impression Management Model, I used my AIM and forum communications technology to convey myself in a certain manner. Although I was very clear in my self-description- i.e. schools I attended, my personal background (50 year old woman with husband and three daughters), sports I played etc, I still practiced deception. Deception is an everyday strategy, without which, my discussion with the 16 year old would probably not have taken place.
Comments on: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=2774598650119543771&postID=7792901544354300644
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=2774598650119543771&postID=3088727084580193394
3: Games and Avoiding My Parents
Players of online games have to make a choice of what communication method to use, and that choice is significantly colored by how much of themselves they want to present. The primary method of communication in most online games is synchronous text messaging. There typically is a window in the corner of the screen that functions as a chatroom and also allows private messages. The communication that occurs within the messages is often the bare minimum, filled with abbreviations and basic interactions like "Ready to go?" and "Where's the chest?" As the player is using both hands to control their avatar, textual communication is interruptive, hence its brevity. The solution to the limited dialogue in the text window is to use voice chat. In the past, a separate program allowed voice communication between players, although newer games have this function built in. Voice chat means the players can communicate and control their avatar simultaneously. From a gameplay standpoint, especially in the large and skilled groups that most frequently use voice chat, the richness of the voice chat channel makes it seam like the optimal match for the very equivocal tasks in online gaming.
Yet I've never once used any voice chat in the games I've played. Voice chat breaks the immersiveness of the games as it creates a strong impression of the person at the other end, far beyond their avatar. There's always the possibility that the female elf mage might really be a 14 year old boy, and that just strikes me as an uncomfortable situation. I'd rather maintain some ambiguity so I don't have to worry about my self-presentation as much.
Similarly, the other day I had to make a clarification to an email I had just sent to my parents. They are planning a visit to Ithaca next month and wanted to figure out what date would be best. I had to talk it over with my brother, as my parents hoped to visit him at Vassar for two days before driving here. After sending out an email with what I thought should be the 1st and 2nd best weekends, my brother told me the 2nd best was preferable. I had to choose a medium to let my parents know about the change. A phone call would have been easiest in terms of discussing all the possibilities, but I didn't want a complex discussion where the locus would probably be on myself with a negative valence. I chose to just send an instant message so I could communicate the basic information with a more in-depth discussion.
My choices in both these situations go against the Media Richness Theory as I chose the leaner channels despite tasks that might have required more equivocality. I cared more about the clarity of the information and didn't want to leave my preferences ambiguous. In the game, I just wanted the basic information without having to form a nuanced impression of the other players, or have them form an impression of me. In these situations, O'Sullivan's model definitely seemed to hold the most weight.
Comments:
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-3-media-selection.html
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/3-from-ebay-to-cornell.html
Yet I've never once used any voice chat in the games I've played. Voice chat breaks the immersiveness of the games as it creates a strong impression of the person at the other end, far beyond their avatar. There's always the possibility that the female elf mage might really be a 14 year old boy, and that just strikes me as an uncomfortable situation. I'd rather maintain some ambiguity so I don't have to worry about my self-presentation as much.
Similarly, the other day I had to make a clarification to an email I had just sent to my parents. They are planning a visit to Ithaca next month and wanted to figure out what date would be best. I had to talk it over with my brother, as my parents hoped to visit him at Vassar for two days before driving here. After sending out an email with what I thought should be the 1st and 2nd best weekends, my brother told me the 2nd best was preferable. I had to choose a medium to let my parents know about the change. A phone call would have been easiest in terms of discussing all the possibilities, but I didn't want a complex discussion where the locus would probably be on myself with a negative valence. I chose to just send an instant message so I could communicate the basic information with a more in-depth discussion.
My choices in both these situations go against the Media Richness Theory as I chose the leaner channels despite tasks that might have required more equivocality. I cared more about the clarity of the information and didn't want to leave my preferences ambiguous. In the game, I just wanted the basic information without having to form a nuanced impression of the other players, or have them form an impression of me. In these situations, O'Sullivan's model definitely seemed to hold the most weight.
Comments:
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-3-media-selection.html
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/3-from-ebay-to-cornell.html
3: From eBay to Cornell
The online auction site eBay is a true marvel of the Internet economy. The site connects thousands of buyers and sellers each day in a giant online marketplace. This forum presents an interesting, mostly asynchronous forum for CMC interactions. One particular time on eBay, I won an auction and sent payment to the seller, expecting to receive my new computer game in the mail shortly. Sadly, this never happened.
This incident is a good, if not particularly odd, example of O’Sullivan’s Impression Management Model in action. When disputes between users creep up, eBay offers several escalating steps of action. After one has waited some reasonably long period of time, the site will give you access to the other party’s contact information, including (physical) address and telephone number.
Given these rich media as options and considering the equivocal nature of the sub, the Media Richness Theory would suggest that that I should have called the other person up. However, I chose to stick to non-personal emails and digital eBay complaints because the valence of the conversation was negative. In this case, the valence overrode the “other” locus, which tends to favor non-mediated communication forms.
On the other hand, there are situations when Media Richness Theory definitely asserts itself. At the end of last semester, I was involved with a group project with four other students. Complex projects can of course be broken down into less complicated parts, many of which would be classified as trivial matters. These were dealt with consistently over mediated communications forms such as instant messaging or email rather than over the telephone or via face-to-face meetings. However, when push came to shove and the deadline came rolling around, you can rest assured that we spent several weeks in the lab face-to-face, to ensure that our project came together well.
These were two very limited examples from my own experience, obviously. However, they show that both Media Richness Theory and O’Sullivan’s model both have applications in analyzing different types of conversations. Discarding either in favor of the other would be foolish, as they don’t necessarily disprove one another.
Update
Since many of you were interested, let me tell you that the eBay situation did not end well. The deadbeat seller dissappeared with my money, and eBay/PayPal were not able to get it back from him. You've got to be careful with online purchases, that's for certain!
Comments:
This incident is a good, if not particularly odd, example of O’Sullivan’s Impression Management Model in action. When disputes between users creep up, eBay offers several escalating steps of action. After one has waited some reasonably long period of time, the site will give you access to the other party’s contact information, including (physical) address and telephone number.
Given these rich media as options and considering the equivocal nature of the sub, the Media Richness Theory would suggest that that I should have called the other person up. However, I chose to stick to non-personal emails and digital eBay complaints because the valence of the conversation was negative. In this case, the valence overrode the “other” locus, which tends to favor non-mediated communication forms.
On the other hand, there are situations when Media Richness Theory definitely asserts itself. At the end of last semester, I was involved with a group project with four other students. Complex projects can of course be broken down into less complicated parts, many of which would be classified as trivial matters. These were dealt with consistently over mediated communications forms such as instant messaging or email rather than over the telephone or via face-to-face meetings. However, when push came to shove and the deadline came rolling around, you can rest assured that we spent several weeks in the lab face-to-face, to ensure that our project came together well.
These were two very limited examples from my own experience, obviously. However, they show that both Media Richness Theory and O’Sullivan’s model both have applications in analyzing different types of conversations. Discarding either in favor of the other would be foolish, as they don’t necessarily disprove one another.
Update
Since many of you were interested, let me tell you that the eBay situation did not end well. The deadbeat seller dissappeared with my money, and eBay/PayPal were not able to get it back from him. You've got to be careful with online purchases, that's for certain!
Comments:
Assignment #3, Option 2
Considering theories in how people interact using different forms of media really intrigued me. Both Daft and Lengel’s Media Richness Theory and O’Sullivan’s Impression Management Model provide takes on what kinds of cues we take to decide a medium of communication. Though one is based on equivocality and the other is based on ambiguity-clarity, both analyze the degree of richness of media in a given situation.
I originally had questions for Media Richness Theory, which were exemplified by my first example of media selection. For the past week, my friend and I have been trying to work with each others’ busy schedules to set a time for a dinner date. We constantly bumped into each other as the week passed, but these short encounters never yielded a conclusive setting of date and time. Though Media Richness Theory suggests that in a situation as unequivocal as planning to meet with someone the use of a lean medium would be optimum, MRT lacks analysis on the importance of a message. This message was particularly important to me. Because my friend and I were constantly missing each other, I decided to call her and set an exact date and time for our dinner. Because I could get her feedback, we were able to finally set aside time for each other, instead of playing our never-ending game of “what time is good for you?” instant and text messages. So what happens to MRT when a degree of message importance is added into the mix?
A second media selection has to do with O’Sullivan’s Impression Management Model. Through experience with my personal blog over the years, I’ve come to realize how true the second hypothesis of IMM is. Though I don’t consider myself a particularly boastful person, there are instances when I am proud of something I have done or achieved. The locus in this situation would be myself, with a positive valence, for example. I have found that the best way to display this “pride” or personal boost, is through my blog. Being totally asynchronous, totally viewable to the world, and totally editable, blogs are ideal for conveying (and controlling) messages about the self. I have the maximum control over what is said/displayed about me in my own weblog. On the other hand, any confessions I would need to make could be dulled down so as not to be controversial or extremely negative in the eyes of others.
Comments:
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/a3-sorry-shakespeare-its-not-just-in.html
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/3-me-as-mermaid-johnson-15-year-old.html
I originally had questions for Media Richness Theory, which were exemplified by my first example of media selection. For the past week, my friend and I have been trying to work with each others’ busy schedules to set a time for a dinner date. We constantly bumped into each other as the week passed, but these short encounters never yielded a conclusive setting of date and time. Though Media Richness Theory suggests that in a situation as unequivocal as planning to meet with someone the use of a lean medium would be optimum, MRT lacks analysis on the importance of a message. This message was particularly important to me. Because my friend and I were constantly missing each other, I decided to call her and set an exact date and time for our dinner. Because I could get her feedback, we were able to finally set aside time for each other, instead of playing our never-ending game of “what time is good for you?” instant and text messages. So what happens to MRT when a degree of message importance is added into the mix?
A second media selection has to do with O’Sullivan’s Impression Management Model. Through experience with my personal blog over the years, I’ve come to realize how true the second hypothesis of IMM is. Though I don’t consider myself a particularly boastful person, there are instances when I am proud of something I have done or achieved. The locus in this situation would be myself, with a positive valence, for example. I have found that the best way to display this “pride” or personal boost, is through my blog. Being totally asynchronous, totally viewable to the world, and totally editable, blogs are ideal for conveying (and controlling) messages about the self. I have the maximum control over what is said/displayed about me in my own weblog. On the other hand, any confessions I would need to make could be dulled down so as not to be controversial or extremely negative in the eyes of others.
Comments:
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/a3-sorry-shakespeare-its-not-just-in.html
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/3-me-as-mermaid-johnson-15-year-old.html
A3: Sorry Shakespeare, it's not just in the word
Instant messaging has become one of the preferred methods of communication online due to its capability to carry on a dialogue in real time. Like e-mail, instant messaging allows the sender to converse with anyone who has a computer and an internet connection, regardless of physical location, as long as the other person also has the same client. Many years ago, where AIM was just beginning and ICQ was king, I always found it infinitely more appealing than e-mail. If I was going to be hogging up the phone line anyway, why not talk to friends and family while I’m surfing the web? I found instant messaging useful, simple, fast.
Letter writing, the forerunner to instant messaging and e-mail, was once an art, when literacy was uncommon and paper was nigh impossible to come by. For thousands of years, it has been the preferred means of extended communication by lovers and generals and poets, and yet, nowadays, it has become the tool of spammers and bill-collectors. Yet, despite my dislike for less than swift delivery, I am still touched by the effort expended from a handwritten letter. Maybe it’s the symbolic callback to a simpler time, where the time spent composing the letter showed that the message and the recipient was worth the work.
Besides, without letters, how would I be able to send my rebates out?
So understandably, I found the media richness theory a tad lacking with its argument that “leaner” media would not be suitable for many tasks and that a richer medium would always be better. For simple things, such as asking a friend whether he wanted to eat at 6 PM or 7 PM, I found AIM rather quick and painless. It could do much more than that though; I commonly carry on conversations with faraway friends or puzzle out problem sets with a partner, complex tasks that MRT would never consider instant messaging to be suitable for.
3 - Text, Call, or Meet?
When the idea of media richness theory was presented in class, it certainly seemed reasonable. I certainly text people when my subject is straightforward, and call or meet in person for more complex tasks. My experiences did reflect some thought as to the richness of the communication, but that did not appear to be the only factor in my decision, as Media Richness Theory suggests. While equivocality was one factor in determining the richness of the communication medium, there were other human factors that had to be taken into account when choosing a communication medium.
The first instance where I reflected on my choice of communication media was contacting people to coordinate working on a problem set. This problem set is a weekly assignment that has already become known as incredibly time consuming. I knew that most of my friends would be less than enthusiastic about beginning so early in the week. For this instance I chose to call each individual person that I usually work with. This took longer than sending out a mass text message, as calling five people individually is not efficient. Media Richness Theory says I should have sent that text message since I was just scheduling a meeting, but my experience has told me that people are much less likely to respond to texts. By calling, I am confronting people who don't know the purpose of my call when they answer. The task I desired to perform was unambiguous; it was to set a time and place to meet, and even this should have been simple since we always work at the same location on campus. In this case I chose a richer medium than Media Richness Theory suggests because I am familiar with how other people use text messaging, and was aware that it would be less effective.
In another instance, my choice of media was more supportive of Media Richness Theory. I had been in a conflict with a close friend of mine, and we hadn't talked in a few days. I decided to reconcile with her face to face, for many of the reasons that Media Richness Theory suggests. I wanted to gage my friend's reaction, as well as communicate in a way that was decidedly equivocal. In this case, Media Richness Theory accurately assumes that my desire for more cues will drive me to use a richer medium. In this case I'm confident that the richer medium was the right choice, because there are feedback elements and nonverbal cues that I felt were important to my communication. When the topic of a conversation is a serious matter involving personal issues, face to face conversations offer more cues to determine how genuine a person is, making it the better option.
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-3-my-confessions.html
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-3-selecting-media.html
Assignment 3: Option 2
Assignment 2
Email today has revolutionized the way we communicate. It has become incredibly easy (especially with the inclusion of blackberry devices) to communicate quickly and efficiently although with the risk of ambiguity. However, I find that so long as emails are well thought out and clear, ambiguity does not have to be a major problem.
A recent example of using email was when I had to contact a family friend inquiring about a position at his firm. Naturally knowing someone at the firm who you are applying to helps dramatically so it was a very necessary email. In the email, I basically wrote about how I would like to meet sometime to discuss his career, the firm etc. I chose email because of its ease and that he could respond on his own time. It’s annoying and awkward to call someone while their in the midst of an important conference call. This idea falls under the media richness theory because I was selecting a media with which best fit my intentions. I wanted a clear and concise email that he could respond to at his will. By calling on the phone, I could have called at the wrong time or forget to mentioned specific information that I could have remembered to include in the email. While calling may have been more personal, it just wasn’t necessary in this situation because a basic message was being sent and was rather unequivocal. For O’Sullivan’s model, I wasn’t particularly looking to make any real kind of impression (I’d do that in person) so the leaner medium made sense.
Another instance of using media was when I was contacting one of my sister’s friends on the phone about her current job. Here this task was equivocal because I had a number of rather vague questions. It was also not that weird to call her since I knew her already. This again supports the media richness theory because I was choosing a more rich medium to talk to her and to gain information (and hopefully to impress her to let me get an interview). This fits O’Sullivan’s model as well because I was trying to make more of an impression so I chose the richer medium.
I think that when choosing a medium today many factors come into play other than just what kind of impression you want to display. I think the handiest factor of email is its asynchronicity. That is, its ability for the receiver of your message to respond on their own time, rather than right away that a richer medium such as a phone would cause.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Assignment 3: My Confessions
My mission this weekend seemed fairly simple; I was to take a drive to the mall in
I avoid confrontation whenever possible, so I immediately decided to email my parents about my financial woes instead of calling. I chose the leaner medium to avoid being chastised, i.e., “minimizing costs,” as per the Impression Management model. Although it would have been less ambiguous, and I could have tried to do some damage control with a more synchronous medium, I still opted for the leaner medium. After a few hours I returned the phone call they gave me upon reading the email; both my parents had cooled off and we had a conversation at a relatively normal volume. I chose the medium not based on efficiency as the Media Richness Theory suggests, but based on the Impression Management Model outlined by O’Sullivan.
I also had to confess my irresponsibility to one of my roommates who is in charge of house finances. My first reaction was to send an instant message to her away message when I knew she wasn’t home. I was planning on sounding as casual as possible; playing it down in hopes that she wouldn’t think it was a big deal. I wanted again to use O’Sullivan’s model and choose a lean medium to avoid seeing her reaction. However I was also worried about how she would react to my delay in payment. I didn’t want to cause her undue stress, or have her think less of me as a friend; therefore I felt it necessary to engage her in a face-to-face conversation. I chose a medium that would clear up equivocality and be more efficient than a leaner medium, more in line with the Media Richness Theory. My confession to her went smoothly, she was angry at first, but by being face to face, I read her non-verbal cues, apologized when necessary, and we ended up laughing by the end of our interaction.
Another factor that I believe influenced my medium choice in these two similar confessions was my relationship with the receiver. With my parents, I knew they would be extremely irate when they first found out, but I knew it wouldn’t put a long lasting tension on our relationship. With them I could “take the easy way out,” and choose the leanest, most ambiguous medium possible with few repercussions. Although my friend and I are also close, I wasn’t nearly as sure about what strains my mistake could put on our friendship, so I opted for the richest form of communication possible, even though it was uncomfortable for me.
Something I found interesting about this scenario was that at the time, I didn’t connect these choices to theories we learned in class. It was only after the fact that I realized I was behaving in ways consistent with what we have been learning!
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/3-from-ebay-to-cornell.html
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-3-devout-cahtolic-man.html
Assignment 3: Media Selection
This past weekend i had many opportunities to exercise media selection. The first example of media selection was when I recieved some bad news from home. My English bulldog Petey has been a big part of my family for nine years and he passed away this weekend. I was feeling really down so I called my best friend Josh. In this case I selected the richest medium possible other than a face to face meeting. Petey was everything to me and because of the personal nature of the situation I would think CMC to be inappropriate as well as ineffective in conveying how I felt. O'Sullivan's theory doesn't seem to be able to accurately account for very personal matters. The four routes of communication in the theory are intended to either boost, confess, praise, or accuse. Though I am the locus in this situation, and the valence is negative as it is bad news, I am not confessing anything. The theory says that a buffer should be created if valence is negative, but in this situation a buffer is the last thing I would want. O' Sullivan's theory focuses on impression management and doesn't take into account more personal situations in which impressions are disregarded.
My second example of media selection is less specific. I noticed that depending on the person I was contacting over this weekend there would only be one type of media used, and in most cases it was a phone call. The media richness theory focuses on choosing more or less complicated media depending on the complication of the task. While O'Sullivan's theory was very rooted in efficiency in CMC communication the media richness theory doesn't specifically mention efficiency. It does in fact emphasize efficiency however, because it says that a less equivocal task will obviously need less richness to be completed. I noticed this weekend that efficiency really has no bearing on the type of media that I choose to communicate with. I have found that with even the most unequivocal tasks I still use the richest medium.
My second example of media selection is less specific. I noticed that depending on the person I was contacting over this weekend there would only be one type of media used, and in most cases it was a phone call. The media richness theory focuses on choosing more or less complicated media depending on the complication of the task. While O'Sullivan's theory was very rooted in efficiency in CMC communication the media richness theory doesn't specifically mention efficiency. It does in fact emphasize efficiency however, because it says that a less equivocal task will obviously need less richness to be completed. I noticed this weekend that efficiency really has no bearing on the type of media that I choose to communicate with. I have found that with even the most unequivocal tasks I still use the richest medium.
Assignment 3 Media selection
Hi,
The media richness theory states that the medium someone selects for communication is dependant on the importance of the task. The richness of the medium chosen is directly proportional to the equivocality of the talk.
My first media selection was a need for me to contact my father about some important papers he needed to turn in on my behalf. I chose the most rich medium available being four hours away by making a phone call. I could’ve chosen to e-mail him or text message but since it was crucial that the papers were handed in by a deadline I needed a rich medium. The richness that I needed were availability of feedback, I needed an immediate answer to my question. I also needed personalization being that I was talking to a close family member about a personal matter.
My second was asking a friend if they wanted to play tennis sometime this week. I chose a very lean medium by text messaging them. It was a very unequivocal task, and didn’t require synchronous communication. There was no concern of ambiguous language as this was something I do often with my friend. A rich medium in this case would be unnecessary. The most efficient means for this instance is something quick and easy to deliver involving the least amount of time, thus a text was sent.
I tried to link both of these to the O’sullivan model as well but it doesn’t relate as neither experience deals with a negative or positive. However, if my father wanted to tell me he forgot to hand in the papers on time the O’sullivan model predicts a mediated interaction like e-mail. Or if I were to cancel plans with my friend for tennis because I just didn’t feel like it or had a bad excuse I would also use a more mediated form of communication.
Assignment #3: Deception
After talking with a variety of different male characters for last week’s assignment, I felt that I was pretty well versed in how males interact over computer mediated communication. Thus, I decided to enter the same synchronous chat room as I did last week, only this time, I was not Lauren, a 20 year old female from New York, yet rather Mike, a 20 year old male from New York.
Although most people with e-mail or instant messenger accounts do not spend much time considering the impression their email or IM addresses make, I realized how important my “nickname” was in impression management on the Internet. After all, as Wallace states nicely in Psychology of the Internet, each time someone types a line and contributes it to the conversation, that nickname appears alongside it and becomes an attribute linked to every single thing the person says. Therefore, my first step in my impression management was choosing a screen name that was obviously male, and with a little help from Wallace, I, who entered the chat room last week as prettylady410, entered the chat room this week as toughdude07.
Upon my entrance, I took what I learned from the countless number of males who I observed last week, and typed my opening line, the interpersonal probe: 20/m/ny, a/s/l? Although it was a tad direct and forward, I decided that the less cues I disclosed, the better off I was in keeping my real gender a secret, as described by Wallace and as supported by the social information processing theory. While my directness was a common theme throughout my impression management, I also continued to manage my impressions by trying to say things that were so obviously “guy-like.” Interestingly, however, I found myself using stereotypes throughout many of my conversations. For example, I used the common phrases of “yo,” “dude,” and “sick” more often than Lindsay Lohan’s rehab stays, and spoke of my day in terms of eating, working out, and watching TV.
This synchronous chat room affected my presentation of a “self” in a variety of ways. For starters, CMC online forums such as the one I entered allow people to only share some of who they are in any given situation, and it is thus easy to selectively present what cues people want others to see. Because of the lack of nonverbal, vocal, situational, and physical cues, I was able to pick and choose how I wanted to present myself. I was also able to ensure that any cues that would give away my real identity as a female were not presented to others. Although, according to Goffman and Jung, the ideal self would come through more in asynchronous spaces such as e-mail, I was still able to think about and choose what information I wanted to present to the people I spoke with; my self-descriptions, attitude expressions, and social associations I communicated to others were all presented to the people I spoke with the way I wanted them to see me.
Although most people with e-mail or instant messenger accounts do not spend much time considering the impression their email or IM addresses make, I realized how important my “nickname” was in impression management on the Internet. After all, as Wallace states nicely in Psychology of the Internet, each time someone types a line and contributes it to the conversation, that nickname appears alongside it and becomes an attribute linked to every single thing the person says. Therefore, my first step in my impression management was choosing a screen name that was obviously male, and with a little help from Wallace, I, who entered the chat room last week as prettylady410, entered the chat room this week as toughdude07.
Upon my entrance, I took what I learned from the countless number of males who I observed last week, and typed my opening line, the interpersonal probe: 20/m/ny, a/s/l? Although it was a tad direct and forward, I decided that the less cues I disclosed, the better off I was in keeping my real gender a secret, as described by Wallace and as supported by the social information processing theory. While my directness was a common theme throughout my impression management, I also continued to manage my impressions by trying to say things that were so obviously “guy-like.” Interestingly, however, I found myself using stereotypes throughout many of my conversations. For example, I used the common phrases of “yo,” “dude,” and “sick” more often than Lindsay Lohan’s rehab stays, and spoke of my day in terms of eating, working out, and watching TV.
This synchronous chat room affected my presentation of a “self” in a variety of ways. For starters, CMC online forums such as the one I entered allow people to only share some of who they are in any given situation, and it is thus easy to selectively present what cues people want others to see. Because of the lack of nonverbal, vocal, situational, and physical cues, I was able to pick and choose how I wanted to present myself. I was also able to ensure that any cues that would give away my real identity as a female were not presented to others. Although, according to Goffman and Jung, the ideal self would come through more in asynchronous spaces such as e-mail, I was still able to think about and choose what information I wanted to present to the people I spoke with; my self-descriptions, attitude expressions, and social associations I communicated to others were all presented to the people I spoke with the way I wanted them to see me.
assignment 3: a devout cahtolic man
The psychological space I chose to do an identity switch in was a religious chat room by the name of Victory in Jesus. I was a little apprehensive when entering especially since I was posing as a male. When I logged in as Brian, I was immediately approached by women, more vigorously by a woman with the screen name Sonshinegal2. She began by saying hi and asking me how I was but then stopped. Being a female, I’m assuming she was waiting for me (the guy) to do something, ask questions, or peruse her in conversation. I realized this after a few minutes and decided maybe I should say something. We began talking about life and she was acting like a mentor, always giving advice and wanting to help in some way. I also found it interesting that she didn’t ask how old I was or any personal questions of any sort. Since I wasn’t asked I decided I wasn’t going to pursue the topic either. Although not many cues were present, I pictured this woman as a lonely middle-aged women and I presume this by her choice of words and her immediate welcoming of members made me think of her a “mother” figure. It’s almost as if she wanted everyone to feel included and felt she was the one responsible for that.
When chatting, I had to think how I was going to phrase things and what qualities I wanted to express. In addition, I would naturally keep my responses short and to the point just to keep my identity secure. I would act ignorant when they randomly talked about baking and clothing. Everyone chatting, even Sonshinegirl2, would exclude me from these conversations even when trying to join in. I was presenting myself in a way that would confirm who I was and I only gave out information that I wanted others to know. As an impression manager, I had control over what I wanted the impression developer to know. Giving out too much information, in my case, might have ruined my disguise and blown my cover. My self-descriptions gave my desired impression of myself, which of course was my desire to be viewed as a man. I gave responses as I thought a man would and to my fortune, I pulled it off. I tried not to be so emotional and tried to link myself with attributes guys would be more associated with to further enhance my character. Since it was a religious chat, I associated myself as being a devout Catholic and believer in God. All these tactics enabled me to successfully achieve an identity switch. According to Wallace’s Psychology of the internet, women pretending to be men online are looked upon as being less deceitful than men posing as women.
When chatting, I had to think how I was going to phrase things and what qualities I wanted to express. In addition, I would naturally keep my responses short and to the point just to keep my identity secure. I would act ignorant when they randomly talked about baking and clothing. Everyone chatting, even Sonshinegirl2, would exclude me from these conversations even when trying to join in. I was presenting myself in a way that would confirm who I was and I only gave out information that I wanted others to know. As an impression manager, I had control over what I wanted the impression developer to know. Giving out too much information, in my case, might have ruined my disguise and blown my cover. My self-descriptions gave my desired impression of myself, which of course was my desire to be viewed as a man. I gave responses as I thought a man would and to my fortune, I pulled it off. I tried not to be so emotional and tried to link myself with attributes guys would be more associated with to further enhance my character. Since it was a religious chat, I associated myself as being a devout Catholic and believer in God. All these tactics enabled me to successfully achieve an identity switch. According to Wallace’s Psychology of the internet, women pretending to be men online are looked upon as being less deceitful than men posing as women.
Assignment 3: Me as an Older Man
I managed my impression by selecting which attributes to present. I wanted to make sure she knew I was clean cut. When I asked her to tell me about herself, she responded with her physical measurements. I told her she sounded beautiful, but I was actually looking for details about her personality. I chose to say this because it made me sound like a gentlemen who respects women. She was slow to respond with some traits, and I felt like she was being rude. Her hesitance made me feel like she wanted to talk only about physical appearance and not anything deeper. However, I realize this was my thinking on the terms of the fundamental attribution error. I assumed her slow response was because she was a promiscuous or rude person when it could very well be that she was busy or talking to another person. If it were me who were slow to respond and someone accused me of being superficial or impolite, I would be insulted since I probably had a good reason (or told myself so).
My selves presented were ideal and actual self. Even though ideal self is more likely to happen in an asynchronous environment, I found myself trying to acting the way I felt a gentleman should. Of course, this was due to the fact that I had developed an ideal character before beginning my chat. However, if I decided how I wanted to be viewed each time I entered CMC, I could always portray my ideal self. My actual self was inevitable because at times, I slipped out of character. Being online, I did not put much effort into my character because no one could see me. If it were FtF and I were dressing up as a man literally, I would be more careful. Since I didn’t have to worry about physical traits of a man, I forget to continue my impression after a while. For example, I accidentally used an emoticon and too many exclamation points. I thought I was being friendly and outgoing, but after reading Jason Cohen’s blog, I realized I was wrong. He said that these were classic female chatting characteristics. Oh well! =]
Blog #3 Does slow texting affect Media Richness Theory?
I was just trying to switch identities and enter into a psychological space, but I received a text-message in the middle of it and decided to switch my blog to observations about media selection. The text was from my girlfriend saying “hey when can you talk later tonight?” I responded by picking up my phone and calling her. This action contradicts the Media Richness Theory. According to the theory, I should have simply responded back by the most efficient media for the task, in this case, probably responding with a text back. However, I chose to call back, a much richer media which was inefficient for simply answering a question about when we could talk. There is one twist to this simple looking interaction. Part of the reason I made this decision was because I am a notoriously poor text-messager and it would have taken me longer to actually type a response than it took to call. Media Richness Theory (MRT) looks for the “optimal match between equivocality of a communication task and the richness of the medium.” I can’t specifically see how MRT addresses the “ease of use” of different mediums and wonder if there is any literature about this topic.
A second media selection I noted recently was in a communication I had with my advisor about an upcoming meeting that was scheduled. I chose to e-mail my professor about rescheduling the meeting. The use of a nonsynchronious chat such as e-mail is a very ambiguous form of communication with very little cues. For a small task such as changing the meeting time this choice supports the MRT as it is a lean media for a task that is not very equivocal. With regards to O’Sulivan’s Impression Management Model, neither of my examples were particularly positive or negative, so it is difficult to measure my communications as having any valence.
Assignment 3: Selecting Media
New communication technologies such as text messaging and Facebook have certainly made our lives easier, but they also cater to our laziness. Want to avoid an awkward encounter with a love interest? Just send them a text message asking them out to dinner! This saves time and avoids all risk of embarrassment. College students today rely on these social buffers. What better way to control your impression on others than to use an impersonal form of communication? While I personally think that our generation suffers from decreased socialization skills, I recognize the convenience in using “lean media” to communicate. I’ve noticed that when I make decisions about media selection, several factors come into play.
I work as an advertising associate at the Cornell Daily Sun. Recently, I have had to contact businesses and student organizations to see if they are interested in advertising in our new “Going Out Guide”. I debated for a while whether the best approach was calling, writing a letter, or sending out an e-mail with the attached rate card that includes ad prices and contract information. Ultimately I decided on e-mail because I thought it was the most efficient. I could send out the same cover letter to all of the companies and attach the rate card all within the same e-mail. This selection supports the Media Richness Theory which says we chose media by efficiently matching the medium of communication with the respective social task. It was most efficient to send the same message out in writing to all of the prospective advertisers. If I took the time to explain the “Going Out Guide” and the cost of the ads to each customer, I would risk omitting some information because each conversation would flow differently. Although e-mail is a lean form of media, it made the most sense because my message was relatively unequivocal. Less cues in this lean form of media was conducive to delivering the correct message to the prospective customers. While this did act as a social buffer between me and the head of each organization, my ultimate decision was driven by efficiency and not how I thought others would perceive me
On a more personal level, I wanted to contact an old friend that I had not spoken to in a while. I considered the potential awkwardness of the situation, but ultimately I chose to call her instead of just using facebook. Would I really be making progress in our relationship if I clung to the social buffer of facebook? I knew that calling her was the most efficient option to rebuild our relationship, since she lives in
Assignment 3, Option 2: Media selection
This past weekend I found myself faced with the task of how I was going to discuss with my parents my living situation for next year. My friends and I were in love with a certain apartment and dead-set on signing the lease. However, the most crucial detail involved in the entire process was the financial aspect, of which I was entirely dependent on my parents’ “OK”. When deciding on a medium to communicate the issue at hand with them, I was conflicted. I was nervous to communicate with them by phone, because I was going to have to be prepared to answer any questions they had about the lease. An e-mail seemed like it would be an easier way to organize the information I had to relay to them. However, upon reflection, I decided that the phone would be a more appropriate medium for numerous reasons. According to O’Sullivan’s Impression Management, I chose to speak with my parents via telephone due to the phone’s ability to convey the message with as much clarity, and as little ambiguity as possible. In this case, the determining factor was not only efficiency. While it may have been more efficient to write what I had to say in an e-mail, my main goal was to clarify the details of the lease with them, which I thought would only be possibly in a medium that enable synchronous communication.
Another instance of media selection occurred when my friends and I were attempting to plan a birthday party for another friend. We initially began planning using Instant Messaging. However, when it became difficult to keep track of everyone’s schedules and ideas that were being communicated, we decided it would be easiest to all meet in person to discuss the plans. The decision to engage in face-to-face communication reflected O’Sullivan’s model, which emphasizes clarity as opposed to the Media Richness Theory’s emphasis on efficiency. While it may have been most efficient to do the planning in the convenience of our own homes in front of our computers, in order to make a clear plan that evaded ambiguity, we decided that face-to-face communication was most appropriate.
Comments:
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/3-me-as-mermaid-johnson-15-year-old.html
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/a3-sorry-shakespeare-its-not-just-in.html
Another instance of media selection occurred when my friends and I were attempting to plan a birthday party for another friend. We initially began planning using Instant Messaging. However, when it became difficult to keep track of everyone’s schedules and ideas that were being communicated, we decided it would be easiest to all meet in person to discuss the plans. The decision to engage in face-to-face communication reflected O’Sullivan’s model, which emphasizes clarity as opposed to the Media Richness Theory’s emphasis on efficiency. While it may have been most efficient to do the planning in the convenience of our own homes in front of our computers, in order to make a clear plan that evaded ambiguity, we decided that face-to-face communication was most appropriate.
Comments:
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/3-me-as-mermaid-johnson-15-year-old.html
http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/a3-sorry-shakespeare-its-not-just-in.html
Assignment #3: Jerry McGuire's mission statement and Joe Camel
One media I am choosing to discuss is mission statements. One I am most familiar with is the mission statement from the movie Jerry McGuire. This mission statement was sent out to all coworkers and was titled, “The Things We Think But Do Not Say: The future of our business”. This is an example of the Impression Management Model, more specifically using a lean channel as a vehicle of communication. By using a lean channel, one is able to communicate things that are difficult to say in person, as well as have the ability to control one’s self-presentation. Jerry McGuire chose to use a lean media since many topics he discussed would be hard to say directly to his boss. The mission statement’s main concern was the importance of upholding ethics in the business. Jerry had to be very careful in the way he presented his case as to not sound like he was pointing fingers or blaming a few certain individuals. Many of his co-workers applauded the mission statement and felt similar feelings. Unfortunately, his boss did not feel the same way…and fired him.
A second type of media I am choosing to discuss is subliminal messages found in advertisements. This is also an example of the Impression Management Model. Advertisers of cigarettes are in a very tough spot, as they are reliant on the company’s success but are also concerned with moral and ethical responsibilities. The advertisements are a type of lean media, where a cigarette company can use photos to depict what they are trying to portray to people. Cigarette companies can’t come right out and say, “Children should start smoking because it is cool and will increase future revenues”. They have to use subliminal messaging in advertisements, such as associating a luxurious lifestyle with cigarettes, and include a little blurb about the Surgeon General’s Warning. Specifically with children, they can use cartoon characters such as Joe Camel as their mascot. They use Camel Joe as their “logo”, something all companies do, and are able to reach their target audience subliminally, without appearing to be morally unethical.
A second type of media I am choosing to discuss is subliminal messages found in advertisements. This is also an example of the Impression Management Model. Advertisers of cigarettes are in a very tough spot, as they are reliant on the company’s success but are also concerned with moral and ethical responsibilities. The advertisements are a type of lean media, where a cigarette company can use photos to depict what they are trying to portray to people. Cigarette companies can’t come right out and say, “Children should start smoking because it is cool and will increase future revenues”. They have to use subliminal messaging in advertisements, such as associating a luxurious lifestyle with cigarettes, and include a little blurb about the Surgeon General’s Warning. Specifically with children, they can use cartoon characters such as Joe Camel as their mascot. They use Camel Joe as their “logo”, something all companies do, and are able to reach their target audience subliminally, without appearing to be morally unethical.
#3 - Media Richness Theory study
Over the weekend, I studied the various ways that I chose to communicate with people and how it related to the Media Richness Theory. The first instance of media selection that I noticed was when I wanted to meet some friends for lunch. Without thinking, I pulled out my phone to text a few people. This supports the Media Richness Theory because I chose a lean medium in order to communicate a non-important message. Using text-messaging was the most convenient and efficient way for me to get a simple “hey, lunch @ oakenshields?” to several people at the same time. Since I wasn’t counting on verbal or non-verbal cues to understand their answers, using a quick, lean form of communication was the optimal choice in this instance.
The other instance of media selection that stuck out to me was when I wanted to talk to my best friend from high school. For her freshman year, she is in Italy through a program at NYU, so I hadn’t spoken to her since mid-August and had a lot to tell her. Although this was not the most important of messages, I still wanted to use a rich medium so that I could see her reactions and draw information from both verbal and non-verbal cues. I chose to use the computer program Skype so that we could video-conference. This form of communication is a synchronous chat that also lets me see the person to whom I’m speaking, which gives me access to vocal, verbal, and non-verbal cues. Not only could I hear her voice and draw information from her tone, prosody, exclamations of enthusiasm, and word choice, but I could also see her facial expressions, gestures, and reactions, almost as well as if we were face to face. Since I was seeking a more intimate form of communication, this rich medium was perfect.
Media Richness theory supports both of these instances because I chose the form of communication I thought was most appropriate and convenient for the messages I wanted to convey. For the unimportant, impersonal question I wanted to send to multiple people, only a very lean medium was necessary; however, when I wanted a very personal form of communication, I chose the closest I could get to face to face, which in this case was video conferencing.
The other instance of media selection that stuck out to me was when I wanted to talk to my best friend from high school. For her freshman year, she is in Italy through a program at NYU, so I hadn’t spoken to her since mid-August and had a lot to tell her. Although this was not the most important of messages, I still wanted to use a rich medium so that I could see her reactions and draw information from both verbal and non-verbal cues. I chose to use the computer program Skype so that we could video-conference. This form of communication is a synchronous chat that also lets me see the person to whom I’m speaking, which gives me access to vocal, verbal, and non-verbal cues. Not only could I hear her voice and draw information from her tone, prosody, exclamations of enthusiasm, and word choice, but I could also see her facial expressions, gestures, and reactions, almost as well as if we were face to face. Since I was seeking a more intimate form of communication, this rich medium was perfect.
Media Richness theory supports both of these instances because I chose the form of communication I thought was most appropriate and convenient for the messages I wanted to convey. For the unimportant, impersonal question I wanted to send to multiple people, only a very lean medium was necessary; however, when I wanted a very personal form of communication, I chose the closest I could get to face to face, which in this case was video conferencing.
Online Deception - Assignment # 3
The psychological space that I entered on the internet was an online chatroom through AOL Instant Messenger. There were several chatrooms to choose from such as sports, art, and food, but I chose a generalized chatroom and decided to label myself as a female instead of a male. I made very direct contact with the other people in the chatroom; I was eager to talk and after many of my comments, I made it blatantly obvious that I was female (after messages, I would say phrases such as “You guys wouldn’t understand, it’s just girl-talk” etc.). Every single person in the chatroom believed that I was indeed a female. I would presume that through a medium such as online chatrooms (and computer mediated communication), it is very difficult to pick up on cues that would lead to someone lying about their sex. Possible ways of decoding an individual would only be based on cues that were available, such as one’s screen name and attitude online. Even then, it is still uncertain that one could decipher a male from a female online.
I managed my impressions by being very direct and straight-forward. In the chatroom, people were talking about home furnishing stores, so I added input by stating that the best home furnishing stores are Lowe’s and Pottery Barn. My response was in accordance to ‘standards’ set by people already in the chatroom, so my sex was not challenged or truthfully detected. Because my true identity was never challenged, I was able to continue with my cover, and manage myself based on the structure of the conversations at hand. Additionally, Wallace mentions in her book The Psychology of the Internet, that women tend to have more detailed and emotionally provoking responses than men online. I managed my impressions by following these norms and stayed away from typing such phrases as “how r u,” and “lol” to make myself seem more presentable and lady-like.
This psychological space affected my presentation in many ways. In general, it is very difficult to detect if someone is lying about their sex online. Thus, it was easy for me to say and act a certain way and not have my identity questioned. Had I been in a chatroom dedicated toward cars, sports, or other possible manly titles (and I stated that I was a female but talked like myself), my true identity might have been revealed. Overall, I was able to conceal my identity because of the online medium. The chatroom I entered was one that set me up for as little detection as possible. The situation that I was a part of, follows premises discussed in Comm 245 such as anonymity and parts of the Social Information Processing theory. Anonymity allows individuals to create a ‘second-self’ online because it is difficult for online personas to be detected with minimal verbal and facial cues. The Social Information Processing theory developed by Joe Walther in 1993 states that as the absence of social cues led to a slow transition of information between online users. In this case, truth would reveal that I am not a female, but a male concealing my identity. Along with this theory, it would be assumed that as time increased and more interactions occurred, cues would increase and my true identity could be discovered. I enjoyed this assignment and it shed light on how easy (and scary) it is that people can conceal their true identities online.
Comment link 1:http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-3-selecting-media.html
Comment link 2: http://comm245yellow.blogspot.com/2007/09/assignment-3-weekend-of-change.html
Assignment 3, Option 1: Deceptively Deceptive Deception
For this assignment, I decided that deception was definitely the more interesting option, and so with some anticipation and little trepidation I logged into a generic chat room and gave myself a generic female name, "Linda," (a reference to Sam Raimi's Evil Dead series, but that's unimportant).
True to my expectations, I didn't have to wait long for attention to come my way. Almost immediately I was contacted via one-on-one "whispering" by someone calling himself "Beelzeboss666." Recognizing this name as one of my favorite Tenacious D songs (minus the number), my interest was piqued, and thus began the great deception.
I did pay very close attention to my impression management during this exercise, but even while doing this I was able to form some impressions of my own about my chat partner, which I feel are worth mentioning. First, from his name, I inferred that he was also a Tenacious D fan, which would in all likelihood make him a teenager. This assumption was supported by his use of the Internet slang I so adamantly avoid: things like "lol," substitution of "u" for "you," and so forth.
The rapidity with which he contacted "Linda" one-on-one gave me some more to work with: I was able to infer that Beelzeboss666 probably isn't the most successful person in the world when it comes to relationships and must find it a lot more comfortable to approach girls online than in person. One thing important to note is that I formed all these impressions in under a minute. They would definitely fall under the hyperpersonal model, an example of the overattribution process. Based on absurdly little information and lots of extrapolation, I had formulated a more or less concrete idea of exactly who Beelzeboss666 was. Why this is important comes later.
Now we come to my impression management. I was pretty careful to make sure I came across as genuinely female. Of course the first thing he asked me was the interpersonal probe "a/s/l?" and I responded quickly and directly - in Chapter 3 of Wallace, she states that evasive or indirect answers can arouse suspicion concerning the authenticity of an online persona.
Wallace also states that the prevailing mindset is that women are more emotional than men, so another of my tactics was to respond to Beelzeboss' comments much more animatedly than I normally would have: I made liberal use of exclamation points and interrobangs ("?!" << that thing) and pretended to be genuinely interested in what he had to say. My own morals drew the line at emoticons, however, and I still couldn't bring myself to make smiley faces; but I had told Beelzeboss that I was a college student (and he told me, as I expected, that he was in high school), so there is a chance he merely thought I had outgrown them, that they weren't "in" at institutes of higher learning.
Essentially, I managed the impression I was giving Beelzeboss by making sure very little of my "real" self was visible, acting in ways I normally wouldn't in order to increase the believability of my deception. My self-presentational tactics thus included both self-description (mainly in the form of responses to Beelzeboss' interpersonal probes; I offered little information on my own) and attitude expressions (as described above, with my acting more "female" by means of my utilization of a different chatting style). I feel they were effective in conveying what I was trying to convey, since at no point did Beelzeboss666 overtly question my "femininity."
Obviously, the fact that we were in a chat room, a form of computer mediated communication, affected the self-presentational tactics I was able to use; nonverbal behavior, for instance, is difficult to imitate online (especially since, as I mentioned, I hate emoticons), but there is no doubt in my mind that the impression I formed of Beelzeboss666 was just as instrumental in determining for me how to manage the impression I was making. Having a relatively clear idea of whom I was talking to helped me to decide what to say, when to say it, and how to say it. Had I concluded that Beelzeboss was, say, middle-aged, I would have taken a very different approach and tried to make "Linda" appear more mature; my chatting style would have changed drastically.
All things considered, this was an interesting experience, although I don't think I'll be doing it very often. It seems...a little wrong, on some level.
True to my expectations, I didn't have to wait long for attention to come my way. Almost immediately I was contacted via one-on-one "whispering" by someone calling himself "Beelzeboss666." Recognizing this name as one of my favorite Tenacious D songs (minus the number), my interest was piqued, and thus began the great deception.
I did pay very close attention to my impression management during this exercise, but even while doing this I was able to form some impressions of my own about my chat partner, which I feel are worth mentioning. First, from his name, I inferred that he was also a Tenacious D fan, which would in all likelihood make him a teenager. This assumption was supported by his use of the Internet slang I so adamantly avoid: things like "lol," substitution of "u" for "you," and so forth.
The rapidity with which he contacted "Linda" one-on-one gave me some more to work with: I was able to infer that Beelzeboss666 probably isn't the most successful person in the world when it comes to relationships and must find it a lot more comfortable to approach girls online than in person. One thing important to note is that I formed all these impressions in under a minute. They would definitely fall under the hyperpersonal model, an example of the overattribution process. Based on absurdly little information and lots of extrapolation, I had formulated a more or less concrete idea of exactly who Beelzeboss666 was. Why this is important comes later.
Now we come to my impression management. I was pretty careful to make sure I came across as genuinely female. Of course the first thing he asked me was the interpersonal probe "a/s/l?" and I responded quickly and directly - in Chapter 3 of Wallace, she states that evasive or indirect answers can arouse suspicion concerning the authenticity of an online persona.
Wallace also states that the prevailing mindset is that women are more emotional than men, so another of my tactics was to respond to Beelzeboss' comments much more animatedly than I normally would have: I made liberal use of exclamation points and interrobangs ("?!" << that thing) and pretended to be genuinely interested in what he had to say. My own morals drew the line at emoticons, however, and I still couldn't bring myself to make smiley faces; but I had told Beelzeboss that I was a college student (and he told me, as I expected, that he was in high school), so there is a chance he merely thought I had outgrown them, that they weren't "in" at institutes of higher learning.
Essentially, I managed the impression I was giving Beelzeboss by making sure very little of my "real" self was visible, acting in ways I normally wouldn't in order to increase the believability of my deception. My self-presentational tactics thus included both self-description (mainly in the form of responses to Beelzeboss' interpersonal probes; I offered little information on my own) and attitude expressions (as described above, with my acting more "female" by means of my utilization of a different chatting style). I feel they were effective in conveying what I was trying to convey, since at no point did Beelzeboss666 overtly question my "femininity."
Obviously, the fact that we were in a chat room, a form of computer mediated communication, affected the self-presentational tactics I was able to use; nonverbal behavior, for instance, is difficult to imitate online (especially since, as I mentioned, I hate emoticons), but there is no doubt in my mind that the impression I formed of Beelzeboss666 was just as instrumental in determining for me how to manage the impression I was making. Having a relatively clear idea of whom I was talking to helped me to decide what to say, when to say it, and how to say it. Had I concluded that Beelzeboss was, say, middle-aged, I would have taken a very different approach and tried to make "Linda" appear more mature; my chatting style would have changed drastically.
All things considered, this was an interesting experience, although I don't think I'll be doing it very often. It seems...a little wrong, on some level.
Sunday, September 9, 2007
Assignment Three: The same nails in the same coffin!?
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.
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.
#3 option 2-media selection
In the event that i was involved in a particularly nasty fight with a friend, it would probably be best to talk things over afterward, in hopes of coming to a resolution. I would choose interacting over the phone, or communicating face to face to try and reach a compromise. A fight is never straightforward because each party has a different perception of what happened, and what they want the outcome to be. This highly equivocal social event requires a rich medium, which offers a multiplicity of cues, and allows both parties to respond to one another. Speaking face to face provides for both of these circumstances, making it the best choice for the conflict resolution that needs to occur. According to the Media Richness Theory, fewer social cues can sometimes be a good thing, if the social event is straightforward. However, in this rather ambiguous case, a richer medium is necessary to achieve the best results in communicating each party's opinions and views. Therefore my choice for a richer medium based on the ambiguity of the situation fully supports the Media Richness Theory.
Opposingly, if i needed to know a homework assignment, i might choose a text based medium to contact a friend. Sending an e-mail, or an instant message is completely sufficient, and preffered for this straight forward task. There is no need for a lengthy discussion. This simple question-answer situation is completely unequivocal in nature, therefore, a lean medium is suitable. This event is in keeping with the Media Richness theory which suggests that people choose media based on the task they want to achieve. Unlike the CFO model, which supports the technologically deterministic theory that fewer social cues are always a bad thing, the Media Richness Theory allows the user to choose the media that best suits the task at hand. Inquiring about a missed homeowork assignment is completely straight-forward, therefore requiring a lean medium. This point of view is directly in line with the definition of the media richness theory.
Opposingly, if i needed to know a homework assignment, i might choose a text based medium to contact a friend. Sending an e-mail, or an instant message is completely sufficient, and preffered for this straight forward task. There is no need for a lengthy discussion. This simple question-answer situation is completely unequivocal in nature, therefore, a lean medium is suitable. This event is in keeping with the Media Richness theory which suggests that people choose media based on the task they want to achieve. Unlike the CFO model, which supports the technologically deterministic theory that fewer social cues are always a bad thing, the Media Richness Theory allows the user to choose the media that best suits the task at hand. Inquiring about a missed homeowork assignment is completely straight-forward, therefore requiring a lean medium. This point of view is directly in line with the definition of the media richness theory.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)