Loading...

Computer Mediated Communication Timeline

Open Posted By: ahmad8858 Date: 24/02/2021 Graduate Coursework Writing

 

Create a brief 6- to 8-slide presentation of pivotal moments in computer-mediated communication. As a part of your research for this assignment, refer to the entries for computer-mediated communication in this week's University Library Readings and your readings for Wk 1 from your textbook.

Include the following:

  • At least five pivotal moments in computer mediated communication
  • Two or three sentences that describe why the moment was pivotal--what it changed or how society was transformed
  • Written credits in APA format citing information used for the images and content

Format your assignment according to appropriate course-level APA7 guidelines. cite any pictures with apa7 standards

Submit your assignment as a Microsoft® PowerPoint® presentation.

Category: Accounting & Finance Subjects: Finance Deadline: 12 Hours Budget: $120 - $180 Pages: 2-3 Pages (Short Assignment)

Attachment 1

Loading... Accessibility Information and Tips Revised Date: 07/2015 Back 1 article(s) will be saved.

To continue, in Internet Explorer, select FILE then SAVE AS from your browser's toolbar above. Be sure to save as a plain text file (.txt) or a 'Web Page, HTML only' file (.html). In FireFox, select FILE then SAVE FILE AS from your browser's toolbar above. In Chrome, select right click (with your mouse) on this page and select SAVE AS

EBSCO Publishing   Citation Format: APA (American Psychological Assoc.): NOTE: Review the instructions at http://support.ebsco.com/help/?int=ehost&lang=&feature_id=APA and make any necessary corrections before using. Pay special attention to personal names, capitalization, and dates. Always consult your library resources for the exact formatting and punctuation guidelines. References

Rainie, L., & Wellman, B. (2012). Future of the networked. New Scientist, 215(2875), 24–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0262-4079(12)61936-8

<!--Additional Information: Persistent link to this record (Permalink): https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=a2h&AN=78189512&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=uphoenix End of citation-->

Future of the networked 

OPINION

An always-on world is rapidly reshaping human social interactions. Expect a battle between freedom and control, say Lee Rainie and Barry Wellman

OUR social relationships are changing and technology is at the centre of this unfolding story.

Take stock of your own world. You probably have a few family members and friends who mean the world to you. Then there are the many acquaintances, contacts, "followers" and "consequential strangers" who you only interact with occasionally but who serve useful purposes when you have questions, need to make decisions or require a helping hand.

Your ties to all of them, especially those in the outer reaches of your network, are increasingly mediated through digital technology -- from email to Facebook to Skype calls.

This new social operating system has been emerging for several generations but has accelerated in growth thanks to the recent triple revolution: the widespread adoption of broadband, ubiquitous mobile connectivity and the move from bounded groups -- largely closed circles of interlinked contacts -- to multiple social networks.

We have dubbed the result networked individualism because loose-knit networks are overtaking more densely knit groups and traditional hierarchies as the dominant structure of social interaction.

In the world of networked individuals, the individual is the focus, not the family, the work unit, the neighbourhood or the social group. Each person creates their own network tailored to their needs, maintaining it through their email address and address book, screen name, social and technological filters, and cellphone number.

Networks are thriving. People have more strong ties as well as weak ones. The number of people on the periphery of each network is growing. In this Web 2.0 world, community-building can take new forms. Hobbyists, the civic minded, caregivers, spiritual pathfinders and many others have the option of plugging into existing communities or building their own -- which they often do.

This revolution doesn't mean physical isolation, as some fear. People still value neighbours, because they remain important for everyday socialising and emergencies. Yet neighbours are only about 10 per cent of our significant ties. While people see co-workers and neighbours often, the most important contacts tend to be with people who live elsewhere in the city, region, nation -- and abroad.

The new media are able to facilitate such contact, and, in effect, have become the neighbourhood. And it is heavily populated. Data from the Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project suggests that more than two-thirds of American adults and three-quarters of teenagers have become online content creators through social media and rankings, ratings, commenting and remixing applications. In this world, people can easily locate and connect with others who share their tastes, lifestyles, politics, spiritual practices, ailments or professional aspirations.

With such a fundamental social shift linked to still-developing technology, how it unfolds needs to be considered. We think there are two possible scenarios.

In the first, virtual assistants operating in a semantic web-one in which machines can better assess the ocean of information -- seamlessly mesh a user's life logistics and interests, allowing people to be more productive and more effective at integrating their needs. The merger of data and the physical environment, especially in augmented reality apps, enriches people's experiences as they can summon information about the things they are observing -- a landscape, buildings in an unfamiliar city or even faces of those they encounter.

In this benign world, the challenges of information overload are reduced as these smart agents perform filtering and relevance tests. This lets people interact with their social networks and growing information stores in productive and socially beneficial ways.

In the second scenario, a walled online world of tight corporate permissions and Big Brotherish surveillance by business and the state limits networked life. Personal agents turn out to be double agents, feeding back information on users that can be sold. People are limited in what they can do with their media and networks by those determined to prevent pirating of content.

Moreover, tech firms and their advertising allies scan users' behaviour for commercial exploitation. People's social network practices are quarantined inside filter bubbles that assume they want homogenised content and contact with like-minded individuals, rather than a diversified, broad outreach.

Which will unfold? The future will likely include parts of each. The architecture of the internet -- dominated by the hacker ethic-will facilitate open networks and all the social connection that goes with them. Legal struggles over content ownership and the cost of access may lead to restrictions that could limit the capacity for users to do what they want.

Evolving social norms will push both ways. Some will encourage openness as people want to connect; others will encourage limits as the hassled and hard-pressed withdraw occasionally.

In short, the world will fragment, with some parts moving towards the brighter side of networked individualism and other parts moving towards gated communities and more tightly controlled information flows.

The triple revolution has given rise to far-reaching consequences, though it is not yet clear what the outermost points of impact will be. What is evident is that networked individualism is tightly tied to technological changes on the horizon and that the time is ripe to contemplate the shape of things to come.

~~~~~~~~

By Lee Rainie and Barry Wellman

Lee Rainie directs the Pew Research Center's Internet& American Life Project based in Washington DC. Barry Wellman is a professor of sociology and director of NetLab at the University of Toronto, Canada. Their new book, Networked, is out now (MIT Press)

Copyright of New Scientist is the property of New Scientist Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
	

	
		Back
	




			
			
			
			
			
		    
		

	




Attachment 2

Encyclopedia of Communication Theory

Computer-Mediated Communication

Contributors: Author:David Holmes

Edited by: Stephen W. Littlejohn & Karen A. Foss

Book Title: Encyclopedia of Communication Theory

Chapter Title: "Computer-Mediated Communication"

Pub. Date: 2009

Access Date: February 23, 2021

Publishing Company: SAGE Publications, Inc.

City: Thousand Oaks

Print ISBN: 9781412959377

Online ISBN: 9781412959384

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412959384.n64

Print pages: 162-164

© 2009 SAGE Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

This PDF has been generated from SAGE Knowledge. Please note that the pagination of the online

version will vary from the pagination of the print book.

In the broadest sense, computer-mediated communication (CMC) can be any form of communication that is mediated by digital technology. Thus, a telephone conversation can be said to be computer mediated if each speech act is converted into digital code, transmitted, and then decoded for the listener.

In relation to the speech acts themselves, such a conversation is no different from that mediated by an analogue or human-operated telephone exchange. However, when the conversation is converted into a form that is managed by computing systems, the spatial, temporal, and social contexts of telephony can be radically transformed. Speech acts can be digitally recorded and digitally recognized in ways that are storable and exchangeable with other digital information. Calls can be screened, forwarded, and blocked, and conversations can be timed in ways that are linked to billing; all these properties impact how people use the telephone, whether they use it at all, and how long they use it.

While CMC can take in the study of telephony and interactivity in any computer-mediated form, the most common meaning of it is related to the direct use of personal computers for communication, to the point that today, CMC is often used interchangeably with online Internet communication. Thus e-mail, chat rooms, bulletin boards, and simulated worlds are all forms of CMC. But the distinguishing feature here is that what is being mediated is communication—not information or entertainment. Browsing the World Wide Web and downloading information—the primary activity of Web 1.0 (the original use of the Internet)—are not examples of CMC. Rather, communication between individuals, whether one-to-one or many-to-many, sharing text, sounds, and images in Web 2.0, and interacting in next-generation environments are examples. However, the most common forms of CMC are e-mail, with its very low bandwidth, or the broader-banded online social networking outlets, in which users can post images or music. But in each case, text predominates.

A further division here is between synchronous and asynchronous CMC. Many chat sites, such as the early Internet Relay Chat and “I seek you,” Multi-User Dungeons (MUDs) and MUDs object oriented (MOOs), and today's Second Life are in real time. The bulk of CMC, however, is asynchronous, with e-mail and online social networking offering the convenience of communication that can be stored in a threaded conversation.

The fact that there are several varieties of CMC, according to temporal and bandwidth qualities, has led some researchers to problematize the status and nature of interactivity in CMC.

Interactivity

Founder of the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Sheizaf Rafaeli is a key theorist who can assist in understanding interaction within CMC. In an important 1988 article, Rafaeli distinguishes between connectivity, reactivity, and interactivity. Networks must have a human interface, but they must also have an architecture that makes interactivity possible. Such interactive networks, once established, take on a history of their own, and through such a history, relationships are formed. Two-way communication does not, in itself, guarantee interactivity. Rather, an exchange or action-reaction must develop into a relationship in which one utterance becomes a context for another. Without this form of connectivity, relationships become either circular or solipsistic.

Rafaeli also wants to abandon the dyadic model that is applied to most CMC. Online interactivity is distributed across a network and cannot be reduced to the sum of a point-to-point exchange. Every message takes into account preceding messages, as well as the ways in which previous messages react to one another. This view of interactivity suggests that the actual use of CMC is seldom interactive, particularly in cases of anonymity in CMC discussion groups. For this reason, a fundamental distinction needs to be made between CMC users and groups that have other outside relationships and those that do not.

Computer-Mediated Communication Research Directions

This distinction corresponds to two dominant directions in CMC research—the cues-filter ed-out approach, which focuses research on users, and avatar research. When CMC is experienced as an extension of interpersonal or institutional relationships online, interlocutors are generally referred to as users. When

SAGE © 2009 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

SAGE Reference

Page 2 of 4 Encyclopedia of Communication Theory

interlocutors have no off-line relationship and identities exist only online, they are referred to as avatars.

Cues-Filtered-Out Approach

Research into users is distinctively concerned with the way computer-extended communication mediates face-to-face forms of communication. The face-to-face becomes an analogue and benchmark for measuring the “success” of CMC, which is viewed as substituting for the face-to-face. It is known as a cues-filtered-out approach because it examines which cues of nonverbal communication are missing in the communication event and how they are put “back in.” Particularly important to this perspective, then, is the study of emoticons, the symbols used in e-mail to denote facial expressions, and netiquette, the ways that cyberspace demands the forms of polite protocol expected in embodied life.

Nancy Baym argues that in computer-mediated interaction, people are not able to see, hear, or feel one another, which eliminates their ability to use context cues. This leaves them in a kind of social vacuum that is different from face-to-face talk. Because of this, CMC participants typically find ways of “putting back in” the cues that are lost from external contexts. Therefore, much effort goes into bringing these external contexts into the content of interaction.

Baym also identifies five different sources of impact on CMC: (1) external contexts, in which the use of CMC is set (language, city); (2) the temporal structure of the group (synchronistic or asynchronistic); (3) the infrastructure of the computer system (speed, number of computers, capacity for anonymity, user- friendliness); (4) the purposes for which the CMC is used (interest oriented, uses and gratifications); and (5) the characteristics of the group and its members (group size, educational level of participants).

Avatar Research

The second direction of CMC research—avatar research—which was very popular in the late 1990s, champions the exclusion of external contexts of CMC. This research argues that online identities, or avatars, enjoy a neutral space of interaction. Because there are no cues that can spontaneously signify an interlocutor's appearance, gender, class, and ethnicity, avatars are seen to communicate on an equal footing, without any of the social discrimination that accompanies the above categories. An avatar can exist in a number of CMC environments. The avatar's identity may be limited to textual representation, or in the case of many synchronous forms of simulated CMC—such as MUDs, MOOs, and Second Life—an avatar can take on a visual form and adopt voices and behavior that are constructed online. The avatar does not have an identity or a history other than what is formed online.

In the 1990s, the question of online identity represented by the avatar was a major source of fascination for CMC scholars. Social-psychological and psychoanalytic frameworks have been used to understand virtual identity as a unique form of self-identity without the social inhibitions that exist in real life. The notion of cyberpsychology emerged, and new journals, such as Cyber-Psychology & Behavior, were established. Much of the work in this approach sought to analyze the way CMC relationships might deviate from real-life relationships with respect to honesty, morality, and empathy. Other writers, such as Sherry Turkle, saw CMC as emancipatory because it allowed people to explore their identity in a socially and physically safe simulated reality.

The euphoria that characterized the social psychology of CMC that was popular in the 1990s came under attack from a number of writers who argued that it ignored empirical research showing that CMC is one medium among many by which the same people interact. The concept of the avatar makes sense only if too sharp a distinction is drawn between the virtual life and real life. However, a series of everyday-life types of empirical studies in the late 1990s showed this approach to be unhelpful in explaining why some people spent a great deal of time online while for others, CMC represented a minor part of their communication practices. Moreover, at its height, avatar research could hardly lay claim to providing a representation of some kind of neutral, asocial human nature when it is considered that CMC in the mid-1990s was very much dominated by North American upper-middle-class professionals who shared similar interests.

SAGE © 2009 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

SAGE Reference

Page 3 of 4 Encyclopedia of Communication Theory

In recent years, the interest in the avatar has waned and is of little interest to the net generation of young people who are born as “digital natives” and have not faced the novelty of having to migrate to digital culture. As Susan Herring has noted, the net generation does not relate well to the utopian speculations or the debates about online democracy, identity, and virtuality of earlier decades.

• avatars • interactivity • cues • computer-mediated communication • speech acts • computers • telephony

David Holmes http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412959384.n64 See also

• Digital Cultures • Media Equation Theory • Network Society • New Media Theory • Presence Theory

Further Readings

Baym, N.(1998).The emergence of online community. In S.Jones (Ed.), Cybersociety: Computer-mediated communication and community (pp. 138–163). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Haythornthwaite, C., & Wellman, B.(2002).The Internet and everyday life: An introduction. In B.Wellman, & C.Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Internet and everyday life (pp. 3–41). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Herring, S.Slouching towards the ordinary: Current trends in computer-mediated communication.New Media and Society6(2004).26–36.http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461444804039906 Nancy, J.-L.(1991).The Inoperative Community (ed. P.Connor; trans. PeterConnor, LisaGarbus, MichaelHilland, and SimonaSawhney). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Rafaeli, S.(1988).Interactivity: From new media to communication. In R. P.Hawkins, J. M.Wiemann, & S.Pingree (Eds.), Sage annual review of communication research: Advancing communication science, Vol. 16 (pp. 10–134). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Rafaeli, S., and Sudweeks, F.Networked interactivity.Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication2(4)(1997).Retrieved February 11, 2009, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/v012/issue4/ rafaeli.sudweeks.html Riva, G., and Galimberti, C.Computer-mediated communication: Identity and social interaction in an electronic environment.Genetic, Social and General Psychology Monographs124(1998).434–464. Turkle, S.(1995).Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet.New York: Simon & Schuster. Wellman, B., & Gulia, M.(1999).Virtual communities as communities: Net surfers don't ride alone. In M.Smith, & P.Kollock (Eds.), Communities in cyberspace (pp. 167–194). London: Routledge. Whitty, M.Liar, liar! An examination of how open, supportive and honest people are in chat rooms.Computers in Human Behaviour18(2002).343–352.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632%2801%2900059-0 Whitty, M., and Gavin, J.Age/sex/location: Uncovering the social cues in the development of online relationships.CyberPsychology and Behaviour4(2001).623–630.http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/ 109493101753235223

SAGE © 2009 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

SAGE Reference

Page 4 of 4 Encyclopedia of Communication Theory

  • Encyclopedia of Communication Theory
    • Computer-Mediated Communication
      • Interactivity
      • Computer-Mediated Communication Research Directions
      • Cues-Filtered-Out Approach
      • Avatar Research
      • Further Readings

Attachment 3

Encyclopedia of Human Relationships

Computer-Mediated Communication

Contributors: Author:Brandon Van Der Heide & Joseph B. Walther

Edited by: Harry T. Reis & Susan Sprecher

Book Title: Encyclopedia of Human Relationships

Chapter Title: "Computer-Mediated Communication"

Pub. Date: 2009

Access Date: February 23, 2021

Publishing Company: SAGE Publications, Inc.

City: Thousand Oaks

Print ISBN: 9781412958462

Online ISBN: 9781412958479

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412958479.n98

Print pages: 292-293

© 2009 SAGE Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

This PDF has been generated from SAGE Knowledge. Please note that the pagination of the online

version will vary from the pagination of the print book.

Computer-mediated communication is the domain of human communication in which individuals and groups interact, form impressions, establish relationships, and accomplish tasks using networked computers. Although the timing and stylistic features of communication often distinguish online from offline relationship development and management, people can initiate relationships, establish effective groups, and develop personal partnerships using computer systems.

Generally speaking, people interacting on computers have access to fewer nonverbal cues than those who interact in person. Although early research predicted that people would not be able to form meaningful relationships using computer-mediated communication, subsequent studies have demonstrated that relational communication is indeed amenable to online interaction. Because there are fewer nonverbal cues available to people who are interacting on computers, it typically takes longer for people to achieve their interpersonal goals than when they interact on a face-to-face basis. Malcolm Parks provides a useful metaphor for understanding this aspect of computer-mediated communication: Interpersonal interaction via computers is a garden hose. Interpersonal information can flow like water through the hose and fill a container (an interpersonal impression) just as well as can a large fire hose; it just takes longer with the smaller hose. Since the language and timing of written messages exchanged via computer systems convey all the social information, with no additional matter relayed by nonverbal behavior, it takes longer for people interacting on computers to accrue sufficient social information with which to form and transmit impressions and affective influence statements.

In some cases individuals form more positive impressions of others via computer-mediated communication than they would form had they had a face-to-face conversation. This phenomenon is known as hyperpersonal communication. The nature of computer-mediated communication contributes to the phenomenon of hyperpersonal effects. One characteristic is that computermediated communication allows people to carefully select the ways that they present themselves. For example, college students may carefully edit their grammar when they interact with their professors on the computer so that their professors will infer that they are bright and conscientious. Also, because people are not located in the same place during computer-mediated communication and cannot observe their partners' normal appearance and traits, people idealize their partners' charac teristics. For example, a couple who met on an online dating site and had their first interactions online may overattribute the similarity and attractiveness of their partners. Computer-mediated communication also allows users to craft their messages quite deliberately and edit them to fit their desired self- and partner-oriented stereotypes and communication goals. Computer-mediated communication is also hypothesized to foster mutual influence of idealizing responses so that users come to act in ways consistent with the desires their communication partners envision of them. Hyperpersonal communication tends to occur quickly when people plan to have ongoing interaction with others.

One feature that is common in some computermediated communication settings is anonymous communication. Anonymous communication occurs when people communicate with one another without knowing the specific personal identities of those with whom they are interacting. When people are anonymous in computer-mediated groups, they tend to be influenced by group dynamics more strongly than they otherwise would. Researchers believe that this occurs when people are relating to others and thinking of themselves as members of social groups or categories as opposed to operating as if they were unique individuals. This has the effect of causing people in computer-mediated groups to exhibit behavior that is consistent with group norms. This effect is particularly strong when there is another group, an outgroup, which members implicitly reject. The effect of group norms has been used to explain the occasional occurrence of flaming in online groups, that is, the contagious reciprocation of insults and profanities. Early research claimed that this kind of misbehavior was a result of the lack of nonverbal cues in computermediated communication, and individuals' inability to assess situational norms when they were online. Group identification research provides a better account of flaming, however: When it appears in some groups, it is reciprocated and becomes normative for that group. This is why flaming is not endemic to all computer-mediated communication: It is a function of local group norms exacerbated by anonymity, and not a function of online communication per se. Researchers continue to try to uncover what makes people using computer-mediated communication sometimes remain anonymous and rely on group norms to guide their behavior, while other times people seek and reveal unique information about themselves and interact on a personal level.

SAGE © 2009 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

SAGE Reference

Page 2 of 3 Encyclopedia of Human Relationships

As new technologies develop, innovations allow people to interact with others across multiple communication channels. Research is beginning to focus on mixed-mode relationships in which people interact via computers, other media, and in person. Often this occurs when people meet by way of the Internet and continue their relationship through other telecommunications, leading to face-to-face interaction. This progression is typical when people utilize online dating Web sites to meet and establish relationships with potential romantic partners, but it is also common for spontaneous friendships that develop in Internet discussions that are not romantically oriented. An important issue for these mixed-mode relationships is whether people judge the information their partners present about themselves as truthful. Indeed, some research shows that people becoming involved in romantic relationships seek more information about their potential romantic partners than people who are simply friends with one another. Current research is exploring the characteristics of personal information about online acquaintances which make it either more or less believable. It appears that information is more believable when the person it describes is unlikely to be able to create or manipulate it.

New technologies also support mixed-mode relationships that began offline. Social networking technologies such as Facebook and MySpace allow friends to carry on relationships that move between online and offline venues. Social networking technologies also help people to stay in touch easily with larger networks of acquaintances. These technologies have allowed people who were once out of touch to reconnect easily with one another and continue their relationships online. They are a vital tool for relational maintenance.

Brandon Van Der Heide & , and Joseph B. Walther http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412958479.n98 See also

• Communication, Instant Messaging and Other New Media • First Impressions • Internet, Attraction on • Internet Dating • Technology and Relationships

Further Readings

Lampe, C., Ellison, N., & Steinfield, C.(2007).A familiar Face(book): Profile elements as signals in an online social network. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 435–444). New York: ACM Press.http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240695 Lea, M., O'Shea, T., Fung, P., & Spears, R.(1992).“Flaming” in computer-mediated communication: Observations, explanations and implications. In M.Lea (Ed.), Contexts of computer-mediated communication (pp. 89–112). London: Harvester-Wheatsheaf. Parks, M. R., and Floyd, K.Making friends in cyberspace. Journal of Communication46(1996). 80–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1996.tb01462.x Walther, J. B.Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research23(1996). 3–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365096023001001 Walther, J. B., & Parks, M. R.(2002).Cues filtered out, cues filtered in: Computer-mediated communication and relationships. In M. L.Knapp, & J. A.Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (3rd ed. , pp. 529–563). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

SAGE © 2009 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

SAGE Reference

Page 3 of 3 Encyclopedia of Human Relationships

  • Encyclopedia of Human Relationships
    • Computer-Mediated Communication
      • Further Readings