Getting to Know You: Exploring the Development of Relational Intimacy in Computer-mediated Communication

This study investigates the development of relational intimacy in computer-mediated communication (CMC) by comparing it to face-to-face (FTF) interaction in a laboratory experiment. It also examines the influence of task type, gender, and group composition. Using a mixed-model factorial design, zero-history participants (n = .48) were grouped into dyads and asked to cooperate on low- and high-equivocality tasks over a series of three meetings conducted on three consecutive days. Results indicate that relational intimacy increased over time, but a significant interaction with medium and subsequent analyses reveal that this was only true for the CMC condition. Task type also interacted with time, but it did not have a significant effect on relational intimacy, nor did it interact with medium. Similarly, there was no main effect for either participant gender or group composition, nor did these factors interact with medium. The findings provide some support for the hyperpersonal communication model (Walther, 1996), which predicts that, under certain circumstances, interpersonal relationships can develop in CMC to a greater extent than they can in FTF interactions.

[1]  J. Walther.  Relational Aspects of Computer-Mediated Communication: Experimental Observations over Time , 1995 .

[2]  J. Walther.  Group and Interpersonal Effects in International Computer-Mediated Collaboration , 1997 .

[3]  Karen J. Prager.  The Psychology of Intimacy , 1995 .

[4]  Charles Soukup,et al.  The Gendered Interactional Patterns of Computer-Mediated Chatrooms: A Critical Ethnographic Study , 1999, Inf. Soc..

[5]  J. Walther.  Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interaction , 1992 .

[6]  James J. Cappel,et al.  Ethical Decision Making: A Comparison of Computer- Supported and Face-to-face Group , 2000 .

[7]  Malcolm R. Parks,et al.  Making Friends in Cyberspace , 1996, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[8]  Randolph B. Cooper,et al.  The Effect of Computer-Mediated Communication on Agreement and Acceptance , 1999, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[9]  E. Hobman,et al.  The Expression of Conflict in Computer-Mediated and Face-To-Face Groups , 2002 .

[10]  R. Rosenthal,et al.  Gender and Nonverbal Decoding Skill as Determinants of Interpersonal Expectancy, Effects , 1982 .

[11]  R. Rice.  Task Analyzability, Use of New Media, and Effectiveness: A Multi-Site Exploration of Media Richness , 1992 .

[12]  Jerold L. Hale,et al.  Validation and measurement of the fundamental themes of relational communication , 1987 .

[13]  Laku Chidambaram,et al.  Relational Development in Computer-Supported Groups , 1996, MIS Q..

[14]  Joseph B. Walther,et al.  Is a Picture Worth a Thousand Words? , 2001, Commun. Res..

[15]  R. Spears,et al.  Paralanguage and social perception in computer‐mediated communication , 1992 .

[16]  David Jacobson,et al.  Impression Formation in Cyberspace: Online Expectations and Offline Experiences in Text-based Virtual Communities , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[17]  Susan C. Herring,et al.  Gender and Democracy in Computer-Mediated Communication , 1995, Computerization and Controversy, 2nd Ed..

[18]  Charles Soukup,et al.  Building a Theory of Multi-Media CMC , 2000, New Media Soc..

[19]  Joseph B. Walther,et al.  The Impacts of Emoticons on Message Interpretation in Computer-Mediated Communication , 2001 .

[20]  Oren Etzioni,et al.  Face-to-Face and Computer-Mediated Communities, A Comparative Analysis , 1999, Inf. Soc..

[21]  K. Matheson.  Social cues in computer-mediated negotiations: Gender makes a difference , 1991 .

[22]  J. Walther.  Anticipated Ongoing Interaction Versus Channel Effects on Relational Communication in Computer-Mediated Interaction , 1994 .

[23]  L. Tidwell,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication Effects on Disclosure, Impressions, and Interpersonal Evaluations: Getting to Know One Another a Bit at a Time , 2002 .

[24]  H. Sypher,et al.  Communication Research Measures: A Sourcebook , 1994 .

[25]  Victor Savicki,et al.  Computer Mediated Communication: Gender and Group Composition , 2000, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[26]  J. Walther.  Computer-Mediated Communication , 1996 .

[27]  C. Steinfield,et al.  A Social Influence Model of Technology use , 1990 .

[28]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills , 1975 .

[29]  D. Tannen.  You just don't understand: women and men in conversation. morrow , 1990 .

[30]  Joseph B. Walther,et al.  Misattribution and attributional redirection in distributed virtual groups , 2002, Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[31]  Andrew J. Flanagin,et al.  Computer-Mediated Group Work: The Interaction of Sex and Anonymity , 2002, Commun. Res..

[32]  R. Spears,et al.  Panacea or Panopticon? , 1994 .

[33]  R. Kelly Aune,et al.  Display Rule Development in Romantic Relationships Emotion Management and Perceived Appropriateness of Emotions Across Relationship Stages , 1996 .

[34]  Merrill Warkentin,et al.  Virtual Teams versus Face-to-Face Teams: An Exploratory Study of a Web-based Conference System* , 1997 .

[35]  Jeffrey T. Hancock,et al.  Impression Formation in Computer-Mediated Communication Revisited , 2001, Commun. Res..

[36]  Yu-Ting Caisy Hung,et al.  Gender Differences in the Effects of Media Richness , 1999 .

[37]  Susan C. Herring.  Interactional Coherence in CMC , 1999, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[38]  Li-Ning Huang,et al.  Gender Identification, Interdependence, and Pseudonyms in CMC: Language Patterns in an Electronic Conference , 1999, Inf. Soc..

[39]  Richard L. Daft,et al.  Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design , 1986 .

[40]  John Short,et al.  The social psychology of telecommunications , 1976 .

[41]  David W. Park,et al.  Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interaction , 1994 .

[42]  Louis Leung,et al.  College Student Motives for Chatting on ICQ , 2001, New Media Soc..

[43]  J. Walther,et al.  Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction , 1990 .

[44]  Dale E. Brashers,et al.  The Power of Language in Computer-Mediated Groups , 1995 .

[45]  Dennis M. McInerney,et al.  Cultural Dimensions, Gender, and the Nature of Self‐concept: A Fourteen‐country Study , 1998 .

[46]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Testing Media Richness Theory in the New Media: The Effects of Cues, Feedback, and Task Equivocality , 1998, Inf. Syst. Res..

[47]  J. McGrath,et al.  Group Task Performance and Communication Technology , 1993 .