Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Coye Cheshire & Andrew Fiore June 29, 2015 // Computer-Mediated Communication Social perception and interpretation.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Coye Cheshire & Andrew Fiore June 29, 2015 // Computer-Mediated Communication Social perception and interpretation."— Presentation transcript:

1 Coye Cheshire & Andrew Fiore June 29, 2015 // Computer-Mediated Communication Social perception and interpretation

2 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore1 “The sensorial parsimony of plain text tends to entice users into engaging their imaginations to fill in missing details while, comparatively speaking, the richness of stimuli in fancy [systems] has an opposite tendency, pushing users’ imaginations into a more passive role.” — Curtis (1992)

3 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore2 designers Social shaping of technology

4 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore3

5 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore4 Forming impressions in CMC  “Cognitive misers”: Making the most of limited cues  Social Information Processing (Walther)  Reciprocal re-use of what they notice in others

6 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore5 Strategic vs. authentic self-presentation Anticipated future interaction?

7 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore6 Is it deception? Or is it…  Misperception of self (foggy mirror)  Different readings of ambiguous labels  Self-enhancement (not intent to deceive)  Circumvention of technological constraints

8 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore7 Some points on methodology  Inductive vs. deductive research  Theoretical sampling  Why not use random sampling?  Semi-structured interviews  “Coding” responses

9 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore8

10 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore9

11 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore10 Stylistic differences by gender  Men  Assertions  Self-promotion  Rhetorical questions  Profanity  Sexual references  Sarcasm  Challenges  Insults  Women  Hedges  Justifications  Expressions of emotion  Smiling/laughter  Personal pronouns  Supportive language  Polite language

12 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore11 Turing Test  Proposed by Alan Turing in 1950  Machine “passes” if it is indistinguishable from a human in synchronous textual communication

13 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore12

14 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore13

15 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore14

16 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore15

17 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore16

18 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore17

19 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore18

20 6/29/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore19 Herring & Martinson findings  Performers employ stereotypical features  Discourse styles: more reliable, hard to fake?  Real-life gender shows through  Performers were no better at portraying their own gender than the other gender!  How can this be?


Download ppt "Coye Cheshire & Andrew Fiore June 29, 2015 // Computer-Mediated Communication Social perception and interpretation."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google