Walthers Social Information Processing Theory - Essay Example

Walther’s Social Information Processing Theory This paper selects Walther’s Social Information Processing theory through Computer Mediated Communication and justifies that it meets with the standards set out by Griffin for a good theory. The CMC is more robust in that it is a scientific and hence an objective theory that its usefulness in the present day situation of globalization is not undermined by the limitations of interpretive perspectives of a theory. Griffin’s prescription for a theory of utility and practical value fits well into the Walther’s Social Information Processing theory. Introduction Communication process can be explained from a variety of different theoretical frameworks. (Griffin, 2000) The term ‘communication’ has its Latin roots ‘to communicate’ meaning ‘to share’ and ‘to make common’. It is a process of sending and receiving messages. It requires at least two ‘contribute’ for the reciprocal process as a part of “ongoing and dynamic sequence of events”. There needs to be a message to be shared among the ‘contribute’ and a medium of exchange (Dickson,2003, p 12-13).Message is the pattern of thought, configuration of ideas or other form of response expressed by individuals as behavioral manifestations of thoughts and feelings. These manifestations are encoded into a physical form for being transmitted to the recipients who decode and attach meaning to them. And the medium of exchange falling into three types are presentational, representational and technological/mechanical. Presentational refers to the voice, face and body, representational, books, paintings, architecture and photographs and technological, television, CD, radio and telephone. (Dickson, 2003) As said at the outset, communication theory comes in different models. This paper would discuss the “Theory of Social Information Processing” (SIP) selected out of the existing theories of communication and examines whether it is primarily objective or interpretive and where it fits in Griffin’s Map of Theory of Traditions. In other words, the idea of the theory of social information processing being objective or interpretive will be tested as per standards posited by Griffin E (2008) in his Map of Theory of Traditions applying the epistemology, ontology and axiology requirements essential for a theory. Theory summary The Social Information Processing theory refers to the interpersonal communication development through online as opposed to communication face to face (FtF). This Theory was developed by Joseph Walther in 1992. Although online communication takes time to develop between individuals, it tends to be more durable than face to face communication is, in the long run. An advantage of online relationship or communication is that it facilitates development of what could not be achieved face to face due to inter-group differences. (Walther, J. B., & Parks, M.2002). In his study, Walther (1992) chooses computer-mediated communication (CMC) through emails and computer conferencing wherein the senders and receivers exchange encoded messages through their respective computers. The distinguishing feature of CMC is the absence of nonverbal cues found in the relational information of face to face communication, which deficiency affects sender’s intended meaning of their messages and their interpretation by the receivers. Hence such features limit their suitability and renders group-problem solving less effective or ineffective. CMC is therefore less personal or less socioemotional than face to face communication. It is more businesslike and task oriented. Walther counters this by pointing out that several investigations have not been able to prove the undersocial effect of the CMC. Walthers attempts to critically evaluate the theories against CMC and aims to arrive at alternative predictions. The initial shortcomings in the CMC between unacquainted partners should disappear overtime. Instead, social information processing starts to develop, enriched by verbal and nonverbal cues. Social presence theory, absence of social context cues and media richness theory are discussed to highlight how CMC featuring them affects communication. Social presence theory refers to the feeling generated by the communicative interaction by joint involvement of the actors. Social presence which is a differential factor in communication media is limited in CMC rendering messages in that medium to be impersonal. Walther quotes Short et al (1976) as saying that electronic media suffers from its limited capacity to display facial expression, direction of looks, dress and nonverbal and vocal cues. While dealing with audio and video, Stark et al have said that quality of a medium of communication is determined by the content of social presence. Walther (1992) counters this proposition by the fact of several CMC researchers using priori rather than subjective approach in assessing the social presence. The hypotheses of lack of social context cues in CMC environment is that it is bereft of social situation otherwise perceivable by face-to face settings comprised of cues conveyed in spatial features ,artifacts and physical adornments. This is also countered by the argument that absence of such cues results in uninhibited communication without insults, swearing and hostile and intense language besides greater self-absorption and messages depicting status equalization. It also leads to equal participation. Cuelessness makes the actors disinhibited and they would not hesitate speaking to higher-status participants. Further, CMC occurs in several contexts in that lack of social presence and social context cues that determine structural characteristics of communication through computer channel, are irrelevant. (Walther 1992). Media Richness Media richness theory refers to the variability of communication depending upon the bandwidth and cue systems. Face to face communication is claimed to be the richest given the availability of instant feedback enriched by cues ,channels utilized, nonverbal cues coming from facial and oral expressions etc as opposed to CMC considered a lean channel in the absence of nonverbal cues. Walther responds that when messages are simple and unambiguous, CMC is sufficient and more efficient when shadow functions and interaction efforts are not necessary. When geographical distance prevents face to face communication that is prohibitive in cost, CMC is the only choice. (Walther 1992). Griffin’s (2008) account of Walther’s argument on CMC within the context of social information processing is that both CMC and face-to-face are useful in different situations and hence one is not inferior to another. They prove to be the apt mediums in their own rights for exchange of social messages and resultant relational growth. Walther calls his theory of information processing as the relationships between the actors grow depending upon the first impression on encountering one another. His SIP theory is so called because the personal information obtained through CMC impacts on the mental image of the other. Walthers also does not believe that absence of nonverbal cues in CMC is fatal flaw to SIP. The SIP theory flowing out of CMC is justified by its two distinct features. One, verbal cues enable formation of impression of others through textual messages. Second, social information is slower than in face to face but the relationship so formed is stronger and more enduring. The verbal cues replace nonverbal cues in face to face. As by nature humans are gregarious, they tend to show emotions in CMC’s textual messages as much as they display in their face to face encounters. Walthers and his two students tested how CMC could be used to pursue their social goals and display affinity. When the participants in two groups acted in a friendly and unfriendly manner respectively, the results showed no difference in emotions perceived by them. CMC is doubtless task oriented and impersonal even though slower than face to face as it is four times effective as much as the latter in that face to face communication takes four times as long to say via CMC. Walther advocates repeat messages in CMC as it is slower than face to face in conveyance of the messages. Further, chronemic cues and expectation of future encounters can also pave way for actors to come closer on the web. Hyperpersonal relationship is only possible on the CMC as there is more intimacy in romance than when people are physically together. By virtue of CMC encounters not being proximal, four types of media effects manifest. They are selective self presentation, over attribution of similarity, communicating at one’s own convenience and self-fulfilling prophecy. Selective self-presentation refers to people’s opportunity to make positive impression by adjusting their self image as relationships develop. Overattribution refers to the process of perception of the receiver trying to assess the people by their actions. As there are no cues, receiver overattributes the messages and perceives an ideal image of the sender. When there are no contrasting cues, the actors develop a feeling of similarity and solidarity. Communicating at one’s convenience refers to that the actors need not use CMC simultaneously and this gives them opportunity go through their messages over and over again as opposed to hasty responses in simultaneous or spontaneous responses. Self-fulfilling prophecy refers to expecting the responder to react the way it is desired by the sender. This creates a hyperpositive image of the other person in CMC setting. In sum, Walthers rejects the idea that CMC is an inferior medium for relational communication. His empirical studies show that online relationship develops at faster pace than in the offline relationship. Mapping of the theory Griffin (2008) says that a theory can be objective or interpretive depending on the nature of the study. An objective theory which explains an event or human behaviour gives clarity to an otherwise chaotic situation. It synthesizes data and concentrates on what is crucial and ignores others of little relevance. It is scientific capable of predicting future events. The objective theory is also simple to the extent possible. Besides it is testable in that when proved wrong, there must be a method to demonstrate the error. The objective theory above all should have practical utility. An interpretive theory is characterized by a new understanding of people, values clarification, ethical standards, equality, aesthetic appeal, support from peers and ability to change. Comparison between the two shows that both create an understanding by explanation through question answering and both are forward looking i.e prediction of what will happen and clarifying what should happen. Besides one is simple and another is having aesthetic appeal. And one involves testing hypothesis and another brings about community agreement. Lastly, one being more of practical value rather than the other that seeks to reform unjust practices. (Weighing the Words). .Griffin cities Robert Craig’s identification of seven traditions of communication theory. They are socio-psychological tradition, the cybernetic tradition, rhetorical tradition, the semiotic tradition, the socio-cultural tradition, the critical tradition and the phenomenological tradition. The SIP theory of Walther fits into the cybernetic tradition which means communication as information processing. Walther’s being an objective theory, it falls into the description of Claude Shannon who founded the theory of information processing. The theory of CMC has also the epistemological, ontological and axiological framework. The Epistemology of the CMC is that it is a scientific knowledge that can be tested and validated. It refers to examining the way of studying phenomena usually by a scientific method. The CMC theory is also characterized by ontology as a conceptualization or a catalogue of things assumed to exist in a domain of knowledge. It refers to how theorists have the view of the world. The reality of CMC is that it is more of an objective view of the world rather than that of the nominalist who views the world subjectively or that of the social constructionist who views the world in middle ground of objective and subjective views. The CMC is also supported by the axiology a theory should have, as a set of values that encourage a theorist to develop a theory. Theory analysis Griffin says that a good objective theory should make clarity out of a chaotic situation. It should focus on the important variables ignoring the irrelevant data along side. It should be explanatory enough to say what is happening and why. There should be a prediction of future events just as in physical science unlike in a social science which relies on probability. The objective theory should have the standard capable of being tested. The theory should have a practical utility giving an increased control. One should avoid dismissing a theory as impractical without understanding it fully (Griffin, 2008). Walther’s theory of CMC falls squarely within Griffin’s objective theory analysis as above. CMC is impersonal and focuses its attention on the achieving the objective without giving the receiver, any clue of the kind of response desired by the sender. The receiver transmits a message that is unbiased without being influenced by the expectations of the sender. This is desirable because decision making is not influenced by any cues or body language of the sender. Such a communication has become as a help rather than as a hindrance. There are criticisms that CMC does not support solving of management problems that are difficult and complex which could be understood only with an adequate insight and understanding and hence formal information as in CMC cannot be rich enough for the purpose. And that they are a limitation and not a liberation. And that CMC is also, too lean to be of a tool for a task related communication. Few others say that it does not give adequate social information which can be acquired only through inter-personal messages in a face to face situation. If that is so, why would any one use CMC at all has not been explained. In a 1991 report, it has been stated that there were 19 million e-mail addresses in private and public systems of the U.S.A. In the whole world, there were about 30 million email addresses as of 1994. There were 45,000 electronic bulletin boards in the U.S.A alone. Ever since 1986, internet has been doubling every year. CMC is not being used for trivial matters alone. It is the uninitiated and novices alone who suspect the objective use of the internet. In interpersonal effects, CMC is said to surpass the interpersonal effects thro FtF. The resultant online communities and online friendships and virtual communities are evident of the said factual situation. Book stores are flooded with books such as Love online and Online dating and Love bytes: The Online Dating Handbook. This is not to suggest that CMC is not popular in formal communications. CMC has replaced travel for meetings and they have been proved to be effective. In fact, in face to face meeting, only 20% of the group does the 80% of the talking as the rest are powerless, shy or capable of performing better otherwise. In the matters of group decision making, an environment without socioemotional communication will facilitate increased task orientation leading to enhanced quality of group work. CMC witnesses more number of people’s participation than in an FtF discussions. (Walther, 1996) The time, space and economic constraints make a compelling case for CMC to stay as an ideal medium of communication. In certain situations, CMC is the only way of communication. In view of these obvious advantages of CMC, the theory of Walther fits well within Griffin’s frame work of an objective communication theory. Conclusion The above account of a selected theory of communication namely Social Information Processing via Computer Mediated Communication has been well documented as an objective theory which eliminates chances for guess work. Griffin theory of a good theory can be doubtless applied to Walther’s Social Information Processing theory. Of all the theories of communication, the study on CMC is timely at the height of electronic marvels, the world and humanity are experiencing today. References Dickson, Hargie, 2003. Skilled Interpersonal Communication: Research Theory and Practice, Routledge Griffin, 2000, A first look at communication theory. Boston, McGraw-Hill. Griffin, 2008, A first look at communication theory. Boston, McGraw-Hill. Weighing the Words, Characteristics of a good objective theory, < http://department.monm.edu/portfolio/2010portfolios/mcorrigan/CATA230_study_guide%5B1%5D.pdf> 12 November 2009 Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. 1976. The Social Psychology of telecommunications. London Wiley. Walther, J.B., 1992. Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interaction, Communication Research, Vol. 19, No. 1, 52-90 Walther, J.B., 1996. Computer-Mediated Communication: Impersonal, and Hyperpersonal Interaction, Communication Research, 23(1) p 3-43 Walther, J. B., & Parks, M. (2002). Cues filtered out, cues filtered in. Handbook of interpersonal communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Read More