Well,
in this era of technology, I believe that all of us involve in Computer-Mediated
Communication. Yes, it definitely includes you, who are reading this blog now. Actually,
what is Computer-Mediated Communication? And, what is the difference between Computer-Mediated Communication and Face to Face Communication?
Computer-Mediated Communication
Computer-Mediated
Communication (CMC) is a process in which human data interaction happens
through one or more networked telecommunication systems. Via many types of
networking technology and software, CMC can be happened. They are email, Internet
Relay Chat (IRC), instant messaging (IM), Usenet and mailing list servers.
As a technology user, we always take this for
granted. We thought it is easy, simple and convenient when we communicate
through CMC. Yet, we forget to communication via face-to-face. Do you actually
know how the feeling of person at opposite side? Can you see the expression of
their faces when both of you just having a Computer-Mediated Communication?
Now,
as a University student, we left home and study. We live outside. There are no
parents and family are beside us. Therefore, we need to learn to be independent
and strong. But, due to the invention of social technology, we can chat with
our family easily. Although it is easy, are you willing to tell your parents
the truth and the challenges that you meet in the University? Telling them that
you are stress now? Are you willing to tell them that you are not feeling well
today? Are you willing to tell them you just eat a piece of bread because PTPTN
is not enough? My own answer is “No”! I do not want them to worry about me. I can
tell them through computer or smart phone. Because of they cannot see my real
face and expression, they cannot know my real situation. In contrast, what
actually happens at hometown, maybe we do not know that much now. It is because
through the Computer-Mediated Communication, we cannot find out the expression,
real situation or even the problem which faced by the opposite side.
To me,
I will wait for the semester break. When I go home, I will only tell my family
the interesting thing and critical problems that I meet in the University. It is
more real and eye contact when we are talking through face-to-face.
There is one theory which can explain my experience. It is Social Presence Theory. It is founded by Short, Williams and Christie in 1976. This approach is the groundwork for many theories on new medium effects. The idea is that a medium’s social effects are principally caused by the degree of social presence which it affords to its users. By social presence is meant a communicator’s sense of awareness of the presence of an interaction partner. This is important for the process by which man comes to know and think about other persons, their characteristics, qualities and inner states (Short et al., 1976). Thus, increased presence leads to a better person perception.
Through
this diagram, we can know that Face-to-Face communication can achieve the
highest effectiveness of communication. It is because at that time, we can see,
we can feel and we can touch too. We can give a quick response to that person
whom we are talking to. Therefore, social presence is very important during an
effective communication. Thus, I prefer Face-to-Face communication.
There
are the other two theory for Computer-Mediated-Theory:
Media Richness Theory
Media richness
theory provides a framework for describing a communication medium’s ability to
reproduce the information sent over it without loss or distortion. For example,
a phone call will not be able to reproduce visual social cues such as gestures.
This makes it less rich (as a communication medium) than video conferencing,
which is able to communicate gestures to some extent, but more rich than email.
Specifically, media richness theory states that the more ambiguous and
uncertain a task is, the richer format of media suits it.
Lack Of Social Context Cues
One big
difference between face-to-face communication and textual online methods is
that a great deal of nonverbal information is lost. In fact, a large part of
face-to-face communication occurs without words, but instead through body
language, use of social space, dress and tone of voice and other forms of
Nonverbal Communication.
Researchers
such as Kiesler and Sproull (Kiesler and Sproull, 1992) have focused much of
their work on the social context of communication. They argue that people use
social context cues to adapt to a communication situation. Artifacts, such as
personal appearance or a seating arrangement, provide static cues. Behavior
gives dynamic cues: nodding, signaling and timing. People are thought to need
social cues to adapt to the hierarchical and other social needs of the
situation and a lack of such cues leaves them self-centered, unregulated and
unable to adapt to the roles and norms of the situation.
Available
social context cues are limited in computer-mediated communication, in fact,
“all communication technologies attenuate to at least some degree the social
context cues available in face-to-face communication” (Kiesler and Sproull,
1992, p. 103).
Because of absent social context cues, social
inhibitions are reduced. Behavior becomes more uninhibited and people display
less sociably desirable behavior. It appears that the lack of cues causes
people to become less concerned with others and reduces the need to be liked by
them. This kind of behavior can exacerbate conflict.
Resources
