Transcript Social Information Processing Theory

Social Information
Processing Theory
Of Joseph Walther
Presented by Hannah Scheffler
Definition and Author




“parties who meet online can develop
relationships just as close as those formed faceto-face—though it takes longer” (A-2)
“relationships grow only to the extent that parties
first gain information about each other and use
that information to form interpersonal
impressions of who they are” (139)
Joseph Walther professor at Michigan State
University
Walther received Woolbert Award from the
National Communication Association in 2002 for
SIP theory published in 1992
Claim and Basis

SIP based on computer-mediated communication
(CMC)
• “text-based messages, which filter out most non-verbal
cues”


Related to social penetration theory (ch. 9) and
uncertainty reduction theory (ch. 10)
SIP claims that “CMC users can get to know each
other and develop a mutual affinity by using the
medium’s available cues to manage their
relational development” (144)
• Affinity—how people express liking

Example: A Cinderella Story
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DImMnb3YSbA
Contrast to SIP

Cues filtered out (CFO) opposite approach to CMC
• Claims that CMC’s “lack of non-verbal cues [is] a fatal
flaw for using the medium for relationship development”
(139)

SIP claims that CMC users can equal the
communication of FTF
• Relationships can develop based on linguistic content
alone
• Takes 4x longer
Factors of Internet Intimacy


Anticipated future interaction—likelihood of future
interaction motivates CMC users to develop
relationships
Chronemic cues—CMC users can check time
messages are sent
• Can indicate various things for different relationships
Hyperpersonal Perspective


“CMC relationships are often more intimate
tha[n] those developed when partners are
physically together” (144)
Possible contributors:
• Selective self-perception
• Lack of attribution
• Asynchronous channel

Example: You’ve Got Mail
Critique



SIP says CMC relationships develop at slower rate
than FTF, studies show same or faster
Walther points out SIP does not consider
differences in affiliation drive
Theory does not account for people to take CMC
to FTF
Let Me Count the Ways: The Interchange of
Verbal and Nonverbal Cues in ComputerMediated and Face-to-Face Affinity

Joseph B. Walther, Tracy Loh, Laura Granka
• Journal of Language and Social Psychology, vol. 24,
no. 1, March 2005


Tests SIP theory assumption CMC users able to
express affinity same as those FTF
Hypotheses:
• One-“Immediacy and affection are affected more by
communicators’ social motivations than by computermediated or face-to-face channels” (42).
• Two-”Greater proportions of the variance in immediacy
and affection are attributable to verbal behavior in CMC
than to verbal behavior in FTF” (42).

Results:
• Hypothesis One supported

Motivation to express affinity varied according to intended
emotional expression and not because of communication
method
• Hypothesis Two supported for immediacy



CMC users gain more affect for verbal behavior than FTF
FTF rely more on nonverbal cues
Importance
• Missing cues differentiate CMC from FTF
• Affinity issues may be readily translatable from one cue
system to another
An Analysis of Socioemotional and Task
Communication in Online Multiplayer
Video Games

Jorge Peña, Jeffrey T. Hancock
• Communication Research, vol. 33, no. 1, February 2006


Tests SIP and CFO in recreational CMC
Example: Star Wars Jedi Knight II Jedi Outcast
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hNIVHSmsYU

Hypotheses:
• 1b-”Online video game participants will produce more
socioemotional than task communication” (97).
• 2b-”Online video game participants will produce more positive
socioemotional than negative socioemotional communication”
(97).
• 3-”More experienced online video game participants will
express more socioemotional communication than less
experienced participants” (98).
• 4-”More experienced online video game participants will use
CMC conventions more frequently than less experienced
participants” (98).

Results:
• Hypothesis 1b supported (SIP theory)

“participants produced significantly more socioemotional
than task communication” (101)
• Hypothesis 2b supported (SIP theory)

“participants produced a significantly larger proportion of
positive socioemotional than negative socioemotional
communication” (101)
• Hypothesis 3 not supported

No more or less socioemotional communication between
more experienced and less experienced participants
• Hypothesis 4 supported

More experienced, more use of specialized conventions (i.e.
emoticons, emotes, abbreviations)

Importance
• Expanded understanding of recreational CMC usage
• SIP theory predictions proven, CFO not
• In relation to SIP, experience is key factor in message
encoding
• By proving SIP assumptions in online gaming, suggests
SIP can be generalized across many forms of mediated
communication
‘I’ve never clicked this much with anyone in
my life’: trust and hyperpersonal
communication in online friendships

Samantha Henderson, Michael Gilding
• New Media & Society, vol. 6, no. 4, 2004


Explore the element of trust in CMC
Hypothesis:
• Trust is not as likely to occur online as face-to-face due
to the anonymity

Results:
• CMC users more likely to elaborate on subject of selfdiscloser that FTF (i.e. more likely to be hyperpersonal)
• Problems for trust online:



Limited cues
Lack of accountability
Scope for deceit and betrayal
• Advantages for trust online:




Limited cues ‘fast-tracked’ self-disclosure
Asynchronous communication
Lack of accountability created opportunities
Importance
• Know limitations and opportunities for relationship
development in CMC
Exam Question

One of the critiques of SIP theory is that it does
not address how to go about taking CMC to FTF;
how could this issue be addressed?