Riva and Galimberti (1998) describe how computer-mediated communication interacts with identity and social interaction. They explain that “communication is not only – or not so much – a transfer of information, but also the activation of a psychosocial relationship, the process by which interlocutors co-construct an area of reality” (Riva & Galimberti, 1998, p. 1).
When I read this sentence it took me a minute to fully grasp what they were claiming… plus I had to look up interlocutor. An interlocutor is one who takes part in dialogue or conversation. These researchers note an important aspect of relationships, that communication is a key element in building relationships. The really interesting component is that the communicator constructs his/her own reality. This supports the theory of linguistic relativity; that language helps to shape our understanding of reality. This idea affects both the communicator in how they draft their message and how the receiver interprets that message.
Knowing this process helps us to understand how social media may play a role in the relationships we build. My last post discussed how Facebook in particular causes negative feelings by users which demonstrate their own reality construction of the intended message. Computer mediated communication allows for more misinterpretations to occur between the communicator and message receiver. Maybe people should write more clearly to reduce this? Maybe readers shouldn’t take Facebook so seriously? Maybe readers should ask the communicator what their intention actually was?
It seems that the articles I’m reading have mostly negative views regarding social media. Richard Landers on his blog Thoughts of a Neo Academic writes about a study conducted analyzing Twitter’s effect on G.P.A. This study utilized Twitter as a teaching tool which had positive results as students G.P.A. scores improved. However, there were confounding variables demonstrating the need of further research on this topic. My point here is that people are also searching for the positive components that social media has to offer.
Both studies show that social media is changing the way we interact and we learn. Social media is a new phenomenon that requires much further research to really determine if it has more positive or negative effects on the population or more likely some combination of the two.
Don't you hate those days after you've handed in a 7-page answer to a comp exam question and then you run into a blog post that makes the answer appear incomplete?
ReplyDeleteHaven't read the Landers blog, but I agree with your point that "people are also searching for the positive components that social media has to offer." In fact, I would argue, we do the same things online that we do in our interpersonal spheres.A good deal of our time is spent looking for novelty, reinforcing, managing, or reducing uncertainty about our existing cognitive and affective states. Much of our mediated relationships are maintained through imagination, just like our F2F relationships.
I better stop before I answer an unwritten comp question, but in short, SM probably has both positive and negative effects, just like our F2F interactions; the positive probably is related to entertainment or uncertainty reduction while the negative is almost certainly related to conflict.
Cheers!