Social Information Social Information Processing TheoryProcessing Theory

Of Joseph WaltherOf Joseph Walther

Presented by Hannah SchefflerPresented by Hannah Scheffler

Definition and AuthorDefinition and Author ““parties who meet online can develop parties who meet online can develop

relationships just as close as those formed face-relationships just as close as those formed face-to-face—though it takes longer” (A-2)to-face—though it takes longer” (A-2)

““relationships grow only to the extent that parties relationships grow only to the extent that parties first gain information about each other and use first gain information about each other and use that information to form interpersonal that information to form interpersonal impressions of who they are” (139)impressions of who they are” (139)

Joseph Walther professor at Michigan State Joseph Walther professor at Michigan State UniversityUniversity

Walther received Woolbert Award from the Walther received Woolbert Award from the National Communication Association in 2002 for National Communication Association in 2002 for SIP theory published in 1992SIP theory published in 1992

Claim and BasisClaim and Basis

SIP based on computer-mediated communication SIP based on computer-mediated communication (CMC)(CMC)• ““text-based messages, which filter out most non-verbal text-based messages, which filter out most non-verbal

cues”cues” Related to social penetration theory (ch. 9) and Related to social penetration theory (ch. 9) and

uncertainty reduction theory (ch. 10)uncertainty reduction theory (ch. 10) SIP claims that “CMC users can get to know each SIP claims that “CMC users can get to know each

other and develop a mutual affinity by using the other and develop a mutual affinity by using the medium’s available cues to manage their medium’s available cues to manage their relational development” (144)relational development” (144)• Affinity—how people express likingAffinity—how people express liking

Example: Example: A Cinderella StoryA Cinderella Story• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DImMnb3YSbA

Contrast to SIPContrast to SIP

Cues filtered out (CFO) opposite approach to CMCCues filtered out (CFO) opposite approach to CMC• Claims that CMC’s “lack of non-verbal cues [is] a fatal Claims that CMC’s “lack of non-verbal cues [is] a fatal

flaw for using the medium for relationship development” flaw for using the medium for relationship development” (139)(139)

SIP claims that CMC users can equal the SIP claims that CMC users can equal the communication of FTF communication of FTF • Relationships can develop based on linguistic content Relationships can develop based on linguistic content

alonealone• Takes 4x longerTakes 4x longer

Factors of Internet IntimacyFactors of Internet Intimacy

Anticipated future interaction—likelihood of future Anticipated future interaction—likelihood of future interaction motivates CMC users to develop interaction motivates CMC users to develop relationshipsrelationships

Chronemic cues—CMC users can check time Chronemic cues—CMC users can check time messages are sentmessages are sent• Can indicate various things for different relationshipsCan indicate various things for different relationships

Hyperpersonal PerspectiveHyperpersonal Perspective

““CMC relationships are often more intimate tha[n] CMC relationships are often more intimate tha[n] those developed when partners are physically those developed when partners are physically together” (144)together” (144)

Possible contributors:Possible contributors:• Selective self-perceptionSelective self-perception• Lack of attributionLack of attribution• Asynchronous channelAsynchronous channel

Example: Example: You’ve Got MailYou’ve Got Mail

CritiqueCritique

SIP says CMC relationships develop at slower rate SIP says CMC relationships develop at slower rate than FTF, studies show same or fasterthan FTF, studies show same or faster

Walther points out SIP does not consider Walther points out SIP does not consider differences in affiliation drivedifferences in affiliation drive

Theory does not account for people to take CMC Theory does not account for people to take CMC to FTFto FTF

Let Me Count the Ways: The Interchange of Let Me Count the Ways: The Interchange of Verbal and Nonverbal Cues in Computer-Verbal and Nonverbal Cues in Computer-

Mediated and Face-to-Face AffinityMediated and Face-to-Face Affinity Joseph B. Walther, Tracy Loh, Laura GrankaJoseph B. Walther, Tracy Loh, Laura Granka

• Journal of Language and Social Psychology, vol. 24, Journal of Language and Social Psychology, vol. 24,

no. 1, March 2005no. 1, March 2005 Tests SIP theory assumption CMC users able to Tests SIP theory assumption CMC users able to

express affinity same as those FTFexpress affinity same as those FTF Hypotheses:Hypotheses:

• One-“Immediacy and affection are affected more by One-“Immediacy and affection are affected more by communicators’ social motivations than by computer-communicators’ social motivations than by computer-mediated or face-to-face channels” (42).mediated or face-to-face channels” (42).

• Two-”Greater proportions of the variance in immediacy Two-”Greater proportions of the variance in immediacy and affection are attributable to verbal behavior in CMC and affection are attributable to verbal behavior in CMC than to verbal behavior in FTF” (42).than to verbal behavior in FTF” (42).

Results:Results:• Hypothesis One supportedHypothesis One supported

Motivation to express affinity varied according to intended Motivation to express affinity varied according to intended emotional expression and not because of communication emotional expression and not because of communication method method

• Hypothesis Two supported for immediacyHypothesis Two supported for immediacy CMC users gain more affect for verbal behavior than FTFCMC users gain more affect for verbal behavior than FTF FTF rely more on nonverbal cuesFTF rely more on nonverbal cues

ImportanceImportance• Missing cues differentiate CMC from FTFMissing cues differentiate CMC from FTF• Affinity issues may be readily translatable from one cue Affinity issues may be readily translatable from one cue

system to anothersystem to another

An Analysis of Socioemotional and Task An Analysis of Socioemotional and Task Communication in Online Multiplayer Communication in Online Multiplayer

Video GamesVideo Games Jorge Peña, Jeffrey T. HancockJorge Peña, Jeffrey T. Hancock

• Communication ResearchCommunication Research, vol. 33, no. 1, February 2006, vol. 33, no. 1, February 2006 Tests SIP and CFO in recreational CMCTests SIP and CFO in recreational CMC Example: Star Wars Jedi Knight II Jedi OutcastExample: Star Wars Jedi Knight II Jedi Outcast

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hNIVHSmsYU Hypotheses:Hypotheses:

• 1b-”Online video game participants will produce more 1b-”Online video game participants will produce more socioemotional than task communication” (97).socioemotional than task communication” (97).

• 2b-”Online video game participants will produce more positive 2b-”Online video game participants will produce more positive socioemotional than negative socioemotional communication” socioemotional than negative socioemotional communication” (97).(97).

• 3-”More experienced online video game participants will 3-”More experienced online video game participants will express more socioemotional communication than less express more socioemotional communication than less experienced participants” (98).experienced participants” (98).

• 4-”More experienced online video game participants will use 4-”More experienced online video game participants will use CMC conventions more frequently than less experienced CMC conventions more frequently than less experienced participants” (98).participants” (98).

Results:Results:• Hypothesis 1b supported (SIP theory)Hypothesis 1b supported (SIP theory)

““participants produced significantly more socioemotional participants produced significantly more socioemotional than task communication” (101)than task communication” (101)

• Hypothesis 2b supported (SIP theory)Hypothesis 2b supported (SIP theory) ““participants produced a significantly larger proportion of participants produced a significantly larger proportion of

positive socioemotional than negative socioemotional positive socioemotional than negative socioemotional communication” (101)communication” (101)

• Hypothesis 3 not supportedHypothesis 3 not supported No more or less socioemotional communication between No more or less socioemotional communication between

more experienced and less experienced participantsmore experienced and less experienced participants

• Hypothesis 4 supportedHypothesis 4 supported More experienced, more use of specialized conventions (i.e. More experienced, more use of specialized conventions (i.e.

emoticons, emotes, abbreviations)emoticons, emotes, abbreviations)

ImportanceImportance• Expanded understanding of recreational CMC usageExpanded understanding of recreational CMC usage• SIP theory predictions proven, CFO notSIP theory predictions proven, CFO not• In relation to SIP, experience is key factor in message In relation to SIP, experience is key factor in message

encodingencoding• By proving SIP assumptions in online gaming, suggests By proving SIP assumptions in online gaming, suggests

SIP can be generalized across many forms of mediated SIP can be generalized across many forms of mediated communicationcommunication

‘‘I’ve never clicked this much with anyone in I’ve never clicked this much with anyone in my life’: trust and hyperpersonal my life’: trust and hyperpersonal

communication in online friendshipscommunication in online friendships Samantha Henderson, Michael GildingSamantha Henderson, Michael Gilding

• New Media & SocietyNew Media & Society, vol. 6, no. 4, 2004, vol. 6, no. 4, 2004 Explore the element of trust in CMCExplore the element of trust in CMC Hypothesis:Hypothesis:

• Trust is not as likely to occur online as face-to-face due Trust is not as likely to occur online as face-to-face due to the anonymityto the anonymity

Results:Results:• CMC users more likely to elaborate on subject of self-CMC users more likely to elaborate on subject of self-

discloser that FTF (i.e. more likely to be hyperpersonal)discloser that FTF (i.e. more likely to be hyperpersonal)• Problems for trust online:Problems for trust online:

Limited cuesLimited cues Lack of accountabilityLack of accountability Scope for deceit and betrayalScope for deceit and betrayal

• Advantages for trust online:Advantages for trust online: Limited cues ‘fast-tracked’ self-disclosureLimited cues ‘fast-tracked’ self-disclosure Asynchronous communicationAsynchronous communication Lack of accountability created opportunitiesLack of accountability created opportunities

ImportanceImportance• Know limitations and opportunities for relationship Know limitations and opportunities for relationship

development in CMCdevelopment in CMC

Exam QuestionExam Question

One of the critiques of SIP theory is that it does One of the critiques of SIP theory is that it does not address how to go about taking CMC to FTF; not address how to go about taking CMC to FTF; how could this issue be addressed?how could this issue be addressed?