Channels, Spring 2018

Page 48 Costello • “Hello? Are You Still There?” What Elements Change in Social Media Relationships? On the cusp of the virtual age, Joseph Walther developed a series of research studies in 1992 that resulted in his Social Information Processing theory. The data postulates that relationships grow only to the extent that the parties first gain information about each other and use that information to form interpersonal impressions (Walther, 1992). This leads to two observations. First, any message spoken in person will take four times longer to say than it would through CMC. This is a significant length of time, and should not be underestimated. Not only does it take more time to say the same message, the chances of miscommunicating within that time are astronomical. However, perhaps to offset this factor, CMC offers a hyper-personal perspective. That means that online relationships are often more intimate than those with partners who are physically together. One of the biggest dangers noted by this theory is over attribution of similarity. Walthers says that “In asynchronous interaction, one may plan, contemplate, and edit one’s comments mindfully and deliberatively than one can in more spontaneous, simultaneous talk” (Griffin et al., 2015). This ability to plan one’s speech or interaction is known as controllability. With this element, people can edit, refine, and rehearse what they want to say, stripping the user of any constraint they would normally face in a physical, face-to-face relationship (Joinson, 1998). Part Three: What Does a Social Media Relationship Look Like? Although CMC relationships might become more intimate, they can lack accuracy and truth within the communicated messages. Are these relationships even worth pursuing? There are some differences in these relationships that must be considered. The first to note is the foundation of motivations. People will use relationships on social media to gratify desires and satisfy needs. If interaction with others on the web helps satisfy a social need, this will impact why and how a user depends on social media. (Hsu, Chang, Lin, & Lin, 2015). Several studies show that the relational quality of offline relationships is higher than online and, yet, the reverse is true for the intimacy level between interpersonal communicators (Hong-Yee CHAN & Lo, 2014). This may because partners can self-disclose without risk of rejection or need to respond. What this does clearly show is that an anonymous context can increase both disclosure and the level of commitment within the relationship (Hong-Yee CHAN & Lo, 2014). Ultimately, social media relationships succeed when interpersonal partners are equipped to connect with others and share their feelings without the pressure of spontaneous responses or social ostracizing (Yang & Bradford Brown, 2016). Notice that while reciprocity and self-disclosure are included in this definition, they play different roles than in a face-to-face relationship. How do these variables change?