Relational Development & Interpersonal Communication In Computer Mediated Contexts

Running Head: COMPUTER-MEDIATED RELATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Relational Development & Interpersonal Communication in Computer Mediated Contexts

Max Smith

Arizona State University

COMPUTER-MEDIATED RELATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 2

Computer-Mediated Communication and Relational Development

As of September 2009, there are reportedly 1.7 billion users on the internet daily

(Minwatts, 2009).With a quarter of the globe using the internet, computer-mediated

communication has never been more prevalent, and yet such a medium is still increasing. Since

the 1990’s, communication studies have been done regarding computer-mediated communication

and the ever growing facets in which people converse using technology (Craig, Cunningham,

Igiel, Ploeger, & Wright, 2007). Computer-mediated communication means communication

being sustained by the use of a machine, in most cases a computer (Walther, 1996). Mediums

developed for business purposes, such as cellular phones, social networking, or computer-

conferencing, continue branching into the interpersonal scope. As this type of communication

expands in use, scholars are more and more pressed to develop theories of how interpersonal

communication behaves over a computer-mediated environment (Craig et al., 2007).

Interpersonal communication is referenced as relational development or developing a dyadic

relationship (Griffin, 2006; Walther, 1996). The more scholars and people alike understand

interpersonal computer-mediated communication, as opposed to face-to-face, the better equipped

they are to develop a relationship via computer-mediation. Although some research has shown

similarities in interpersonal communication between face-to-face and computer-mediated

interaction, social information processing theory would explain differently (Griffin, 2006).

Demonstrating a topical structure, this review explores the effects of computer-mediated

interaction on interpersonal communication (relational development) investigating the variables

of verbal clues of affinity and chronemics as undergrid by social information processing theory.

 Arizona State University – Hugh Downs School of Communication – Smith 


Social Information Processing Theory

To understand how computer-mediated interaction effects relational development an

understanding of how it communicates is necessary. Scholars have used a plethora of theories to

discuss how computer-mediated environments effect communication but for sake of parsimony a

predominant three will be mentioned; Social Presence Theory, Media Richness Theory, and

Social Information Processing Theory (Griffin, 2006).

Social Presence Theory states that textual based messages desensitize users to the feeling

of a warm body interacting with them thus creating a more impersonal and task-oriented setting

of communication (Griffin, 2006). Also, Media Richness theory suggests that computer mediated

communication leaves out highly emotional aesthetics not transferable via computer-mediated

communication (Griffin, 2006). As stated by Griffin (2006), these theories underscore the idea

that computer-mediated interaction is impersonal and set more towards business and task-

oriented jobs than social interaction and relational development. Because this review is focusing

on interpersonal communication, and more importantly relationship development, social

information processing theory is used to frame the research of this paper. Proposed to understand

interpersonal relationships over a computer-mediated environment, Joe Walther developed social

information processing theory (Craig et al., 2007; Griffin, 2006). According to Walther (1996), a

person on-line using computer-mediated interaction to communicate interpersonally, based on

the information gathered (and or any other prior social information) he or she formulates an

impression and what follows is the development of a relationship. Social information processing

theory, congruent with uncertainty reduction and social processing theory, hinges on two main

variables: verbal cues of affinity and chronemics (Griffin, 2006). These variables provide

rationale for relational development via computer-mediated interaction (Griffin, 2006). Verbal



cues, variably speaking, are the verbal nuances users demonstrate to compensate for aesthetic

communication lost through the medium of computer-mediation (Griffin, 2006). Meaning, Non-

verbal cues of affinity one would perceive face-to-face must be conveyed textually when using

computer-mediation (Craig et al., 2007). Chronemics is the study of how people communicating

distinguish and respond to others in regards to issue of time (Doering, & Sandra, 2007; Griffin

2006). Walther states that this variable is so crucial because it is one non-verbal cue that remains

present over computer-mediated communication (Griffin, 2006). Unlike cues such as tone of

voice or interpersonal distance that are lost during computer-mediation, the availability of time is

not; making it that much more important to the development of a relationship. By looking at the

variables of verbal cues of affinity and chronemics, we can determine the effects of computer-

mediated communication in relational development (Griffin, 2006).

Computer-Mediated Environments influencing Interpersonal Communication

Although some research suggest that computer-mediated relationships act similarly to

face-to-face communication, investigating the variables of verbal clues of affinity and

chronemics provide evidence that relational development differs when communicated through a

mode of computer-mediation (Craig et al., 2007; Parks & Roberts 1996; Hara & Yum, 2006;

Walther, 1996).

For example, in given online circumstances, computer mediated-communication has

similarities to face-to-face interpersonal relationships. Hara and Yum (2006) propose that if

motivated by the rationale to communicate socially and meaningfully, the internet is a place

where individuals come to engage in meaningful interpersonal communication. Stating that

people who are motivated to engage in purposeful interpersonal communication regardless of

medium, mode, or culture relational development will follow (Hara & Yum, 2006). Also, Hara



and Yum (2006) found, in terms of disclosure and relationship quality, more similarities are

found than differences between computer-mediated and face-to-face interaction. Stating that the

more information disclosed on both mediums leads to a more rewarding relationship (Hara &

Yum, 2006; Parks & Roberts, 2008; Walther, 1996). Even though some research does show a

comparative side between face-to-face communication and computer mediated communication,

further research demonstrates the effects of computer-mediated interaction on relational

development.

As emphasized by social information processing theory, during relational development

the use of verbal cues of affinity are necessary due to a lack of non-verbal communicating

signals (hand gestures, tone of voice, body proximity, etcetera) that are present during face-to-

face communication (Griffin, 2006). According to Craig et al. (2007), “Similarity and attraction

are two initial interpersonal perceptions that have been found to be important antecedents of

relational development in previous research in both the face-to-face world and on-line (p.13).”

Because users communicating via computer have no non-verbal cues to base this attraction or

similarity, research shows that self-disclosure is a determining factor when looking at verbal cues

of affinity (Antheunis, Peter, & Schouten, 2007; Craig et al., 2007). For example, Ramirez and

Burgoon (2001) conducted a study regarding computer-mediated interaction and media-rich

environments using the social networking cites. Environments that disclose more information

regarding relational partners lead to increased interpersonal communication; suggesting this self-

disclosure is a signpost for healthy relational development (Burgoon & Ramirez, 2001).

In addition to Ramirez and Burgoon, Antheunis et al. (2007) research posits that text-only

based messages increased dyadic self-disclosure when communicating through textual

conversation as opposed to face-to-face. In congruence with social information processing



theory, research also found that the more relevant the information disclosed amongst dyads, the

more interpersonal attraction increased (Antheunis, Peter, & Schouten, 2007). Qualitative

analysis showed that in addition to depth of disclosure, similarity amongst dyads also increased

the greater variety of self-disclosure via on-line interaction (Antheunis, Peter, & Schouten, 2007;

Burgoon & Ramirez, 2001). According to Antheunis, Peter, and Schouten (2007), dyads using a

text-based communicating service rated their relational experience higher or more meaningful

the more variety of self-disclosure witnessed. Stating that the greater variety (in breadth, as

opposed to depth) in which one self-discloses information, the better chance one has to develop a

relationship via a computer-meditation environment (Antheunis, Peter, & Schouten, 2007).

Research also suggests that this self-disclosure is reciprocal as well (Gilding & Henderson, 2004;

Craig et al., 2007). This reciprocation dictates that the more information a sender discloses the

more information he will receive (Antheunis, Peter, & Schouten, 2007; Gilding & Henderson,

2004). The data presented, as suggested by social information processing theory, shows self-

disclosure as a verbal non-cue of affinity and its importance to relational development. While

self-disclosure, a verbal cue of affinity, effects relational development via computer-mediation it

is not the only determining factor.

Chronemics, as stated above, is the study of how people communicating distinguish and

respond to others in regards to time (Doering & Sandra, 2007). According to social information

processing theory, the chronemics of relational development via computer-mediated

communication are focused with the amount of time allotted for each dyad to communicate

(Griffin, 2006). Walther (1996) states that messages online move four times slower than in-

person. During asynchronous communication a person has optimal time to comprise their

message as well as edit their message, requiring more time to accumulate information (Burgoon,



Doering & Sandra, 2007; Ramirez, Sunnafrank, & Walther, 2001). In fact, some research has

shown that asynchronous messaging such as discussion boards and e-mail have more personal

information transferred than comparable face-to-face relationships (Antheunis, Peter, &

Schouten, 2007; Doering & Sandra, 2007; Walther, 1996). This of course is dependent on the

extent of time to communicate Griffin, 1996). An example, asynchronous chat with time

restriction has shown to provide evidence of highly impersonal communication and little

evidence to support the possibility of interpersonal relationship development (Burgoon et al.,

2001; Walther 1996). Trust is another relational factor altered by the extended time variable.

Trust, as described by Gilding & Hendersen (2004), when using computer-mediated

communication is a key component in relational development dictated much by chronemics.

Research shows that dyadic trust increases when more time is allotted for communication

regardless of impersonal or interpersonal (Gilding & Hendersen, 2004; Caplan & High, 2008).

Caplan and High (2008), found that within 206 dyadic participants, restrictions on time lead to

less trust and higher social-anxiety. These figures are congruent with data showing the absence

of ample time negatively effecting interpersonal trust amongst group members (Doering &

Sandra, 2007; Gilding & Hendersen, 2006). Because trust takes time to develop and

conversational time moves slower via computer-mediation, more time is needed to sustain

relational development (Caplan & High, 2008; Gilding & Hendersen, 2004; Griffin 2006). This

data shows the emphasis on the variable of extended time and its necessity to interpersonal

computer-mediated communication.

Self-disclosure, Chronemics, & Relational Development

Computer-mediated relational development, although similar to face-to-face

communication, hinges on two distinct differences described by social information processing



Theory (Walther, 1996). As the paper examines, the richness of relational development via

computer-mediation is dependent on the amount of disclosure found between dyads as well as

the amount of time given for a relationship to develop. The greater breadth and depth at which

information is disclosed, the greater chance of relational development and the same can be said

for time allotted. The more time a dyad has to converse the more the relationship will develop.

This review, however beneficial, is confined by its own limitations: the constant evolution of

communicative technology or sex in relation to computer-mediated communication. Given the

fast-paced fruition of our computer-mediated technology, the combining of all computer-

mediated communication dilutes mediation effects that certain mediums may have distinct from

one another. For example, texting in certain situations may require more time than video

messaging to communicate interpersonally, or, e-mail may require higher levels of self-

disclosure than the use of a social networking cite. Little research surrounds the exact mediation

regarding individual types of computer-mediated communication and relational development.

Also, few studies regarding interpersonal communication and computer-mediation take into

account the sex of the dyad. The sex of each participant may have an effect on how each person

gears their responses and or perceives them; women converse with women differently, as women

converse with men differently, as men converse with men differently, and etcetera. The lack of

information surrounding these subjects makes good discussion for future research.

Researching the exact mediation effects of certain types of computer-mediated

technologies such as tweeting, blogging, or iChatting, in relation to interpersonal communication

could prove a better channel to develop relationships. Also, a study regarding how sex is

perceived and dictated over computer-mediated interaction could show tendencies skewing other

researcher’s data or provide new theoretical framework. Growing from these limitations is how



we continue to compile information bettering our knowledge of a given subject. As society leans

more and more towards using technology to communicate, more will be required to better

understand how communication affects people and is affected by people.

References


COMPUTER-MEDIATED RELATIONAL DEVELOPMENT  10

Antheunis, M., Peter, J., & Schouten, A. (2007). Computer-mediated communication and

interpersonal attraction. Paper presented at the meeting of the International

Communication Association, Washington, D.C.

Burgoon, J.K., & Ramirez, A. (2001). Effects of interactivity on predicted out come values:

The role of media richness and time on mediation in socially oriented computer-mediated

interaction. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Communication Association,

Atlanta, GA.

Burgoon, J.K., Ramirez, A., Sunnafrank, M., & Walther, J.B. (2001). Information seeking

strategies, uncertainty and computer mediated communication. Towards a conceptual

model. Human Communication Research, 28, 213-229.

Craig, E., Cunningham, C., Igiel, M., Ploeger, N., & Wright, K. (2007). Will you be my friend:

Computer-mediated communicated relational development on facebook. Paper presented

at the meeting of the National Communication Association, Washington, D.C.

Caplan, S., & High, A. (2008). Social anxiety and computer mediated communication during

initial reactions. Implications for the hyperpersonal perspective. Paper presented at the

meeting of the International Communication Association, Washington, D.C.

Doering, N., & Sandra, P. (2007, January). Non verbal cues in mobile phone text messages: The

effects of chronemics and proxemics. Paper presented at the meeting of the International

Communication Association, Chicago, IL.

Gilding, M., & Hendersen, S. (2004). I’ve never clicked this much w/ anyone in my life: trust

and interpersonal communication in on-line relationships. New Media & Society, 6, 487-

506.

Griffin, E. (2006). A first look at communication theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.


COMPUTER-MEDIATED RELATIONAL DEVELOPMENT  11

Hara, K., & Yum, Y. (2006). Computer-mediated relational development: A cross-cultural

comparison. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 11, 13-42.

Minwatts Marketing Group. (2009). Internet World Stats: Usage and Population Statistics.

Retrieved November, 26, 2009, from http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm

Parks, M. R., & Roberts, L.D. (1998). Making MOOsic’: The development of personal

relationships on-line and a comparison to their off line counterparts. Journal of

Communication and Personal Relationships, 15, 517-537.

Walther, J.B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal and

hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3-43.


Relational Development & Interpersonal Communication In Computer Mediated Contexts

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (11)

Similar to Relational Development & Interpersonal Communication In Computer Mediated Contexts

Similar to Relational Development & Interpersonal Communication In Computer Mediated Contexts (20)

Relational Development & Interpersonal Communication In Computer Mediated Contexts