Finding a happy medium: explaining the negative effects of electronic communication on social life at work
Abstract
The sometimes observed negative social effects of electronic communication technology are often attributed to the characteristics of the technology itself. Electronic mail, for instance, filters out personal and social cues and provides new capabilities not found in traditional media, and it has been argued that these factors have consequences such as “flaming” and depersonalization. Alternative theoretical perspectives on the impacts of information technology suggest that our ability to explain these outcomes might be enhanced by attending to users' intentional choices about how to use technology and to unpredictable technology usage patterns that emerge when users interact with the technology and each other. These alternative perspectives are examined in the context of an exploratory case study of a complex organization in which electronic mail was heavily used. Users were found to select email deliberately when they wished to avoid unwanted social interactions. At the same time, they actively took steps to avoid negative outcomes, such as depersonalization of their relationships with subordinates. However, despite their well-intentioned efforts, some negative social effects did occur that cannot entirely be attributed to the technological characteristics of electronic communication. Instead, they appear to be ironic side effects of users' thoughtful efforts to use email effectively. These results suggest the value of according a prominent role in explanations of technology…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Communication literature reflects six user-oriented dimensions of interactivity that should be useful for the U&G approach: threats, benefits, sociability, isolation, involvement, and inconvenience.
“Communication literature reflects six user-oriented dimensions of interactivity that should be useful for the U&G approach: threats (Markus, 1994), benefits (S. Ang & Cummings, 1994), sociability (Fulk, Flanagin, Kalman, Monge, & Ryan, 1996), isolation (Dorsher, 1996), involvement (Trevino & Webster, 1992), and inconvenience (Stolz, 1995; Thomas, 1995).”
From Uses and Gratifications Theory in the 21st Century (2000) · cites this paper as Markus, 1994
Cites
Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554 · Cited by 9,868 · see citing works
Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action.
Jick, T. D. (1979) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392366 · Cited by 7,103 · cited 1× · see citing works
“This study triangulate& [Jick 1983] data from interviews, a survey, and archives.”
BackgroundSocial psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication
Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.39.10.1123 · Cited by 2,630 · see citing works
Barley, S. R. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392767 · Cited by 2,315 · see citing works
Information richness. A new approach to managerial behavior and organization design
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1983) · doi:10.21236/ada128980 · Cited by 2,263 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Uses and Gratifications Theory in the 21st Century
Ruggiero, T. E. (2000) · Mass Communication and Society · doi:10.1207/s15327825mcs0301_02 · Cited by 2,810 · see citing works
Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams
Hinds, P. J., & Bailey, D. E. (2003) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.14.6.615.24872 · Cited by 974 · see citing works
CONFLICT AND SHARED IDENTITY IN GEOGRAPHICALLY DISTRIBUTED TEAMS
Mortensen, M., & Hinds, P. J. (2001) · International Journal of Conflict Management · doi:10.1108/eb022856 · Cited by 393 · see citing works
Temporality in Medical Work: Time also Matters
Reddy, M. C., Dourish, P., & Pratt, W. (2006) · Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) · doi:10.1007/s10606-005-9010-z · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Email flaming behaviors and organizational conflict
Turnage, A. K. (2007) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00385.x · Cited by 134 · see citing works
- Authors
- Markus, M. L.
- Affiliations
- Claremont Graduate University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Markus, M. L.
- Venue
- ACM Transactions on Information Systems
- Published
- 1994-04
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 119-149
- ISSN
- 1046-8188 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-2868
- OpenAlex
- W2162228590
- Cited by
- 310
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 15.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ACM Transactions on Information Systems (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Digital Communication and Language
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
- Keywords
- email, depersonalization, flaming, email etiquette, workplace communication, organizational communication
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review