1. To Know from VanLear et al. (2005)
Characteristics of 3 grp types tested:
Asynchronous discussions
Formal synchronous meetings
Informal chats
Which AA grps had most private:
Self-presentations
Agreements
Personal Acceptance
Personal Disclosures
How compared to other, non-AA grps
Which comm behaviors were reciprocal

2. Historically… (Garton & Wellman, 1995)
CMC  Impersonal, “ ”
Merely extension of IP comm…just another context, but all same principles (Miller, 1978)
BUT! may go even deeper than that…
Garton, L., & Wellman, B. (1995). Social impacts of electronic mail in organizations: A review of
the research literature. In B. R. Burleson (Ed.), Communication yearbook 18 (pp ).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Miller, G. R. (1978). The current status of theory and research in interpersonal communication.
Human Communication Research, 4, 164—178.

3. Social Info Processing (SIP Model) (Walther, 1992) ASSUMPTIONS
CMC 
Online, we’re motivated to
Online IPRs require &
to = FtF intimacy levels
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, & G. R. Miller (Eds.), The handbook of
interpersonal communication (3rd ed.. pp ). Thousand Oaks, GA: Sage.
Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19, 52-90

4. 3 Phases of CMC (compared to FtF)
Impersonal
More , due to lacking NV cues
Can avoid social/emotional influence & thus:
Promote
Facilitate group efficiency b/c
Interpersonal
NV cues lean,
Anticipating future comm makes look for more other-info:
Same Immediacy, similarity, receptivity as FtF
Hyperpersonal
More
Social Identity Deindividuation (SIDE) -

5. Walther’s (1996) “Hyperpersonal” Components
SENDER:
CMC is intentional & lacks spontaneous cues so can optimize self-presentation
RECEIVER:
Over-Attributions & SIDE
CMC feedback may magnify personal comm (min.-cues)
CHANNEL MANAGEMENT:
FEEDBACK:
Self-fulfilling prophecies
Walther, L (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal
interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3-43.
Wickham, K.R.; Walther, J.B. (2007). "Perceived behaviors of emergent and assigned leaders in virtual groups". International Journal of e-Collaboration. 35: 59–85.
Toma, Catalina L (2012). "Perceptions of trustworthiness online: the role of visual and textual information". Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work: 13–22. doi: /
Gonzales, Amy; Jeffrey Hancock (17 February 2011). "Mirror, Mirror on my Facebook Wall: Effects of Exposure to Facebook on Self-Esteem". Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 1–2. doi: /cyber

6. Applied Social Support-Seeking
Reasons for Seeking CMC Social-Support (Walther & Boyd, 2001)
Walther, J. B., & Boyd, S. (2001). Attraction to computer-media ted social support. In C. A. Lin 8i
D. Atkin (Eds.), Communication technology and society: Audience adoption and uses ofthe new
media (pp ). New York: Hampton Press.

7. Applied Trust & Online Friendships
Henderson & Gilding (2004):
online trust depends on
CMC performance essential in
Hyperpers. comm & online trust can be facilitated by
Situat. factors in Western society can promote active trust in hyperpers. comm
Henderson, S.; Gilding, M. (2004). "'I've never clicked this much with anyone in my life': Trust and hyperpersonal communication in online friendships". New Media & Society. 6 (4): 487–506. doi: /

8. Limitations