The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Affect in Computer-Meditated Communication: An Experiment in Synchronous Terminal-to-Terminal Discussion
Abstract
With the spread of computer networks, communication via computer conferences, electronic mail, and computer bulletin boards will become more common in society, but little is known about the social psychological implications of these technologies. One possibility is a change in physiological arousal, feelings, and expressive behavior-that is, affect. These computer-mediated communication technologies focus attention on the message, transmit social information poorly, and do not have a well-developed social etiquette. Therefore, these technologies might be associated with less attention to others, less social feedback, and depersonalization of the communication setting. In the present study we examined what would happen to feelings and interpersonal behavior in an experiment in which two people met for the first time and discussed a series of questions in order to get to know one another. We measured physiological arousal (pulse and palmar sweat), subjective affect (emotional state and evaluations), and expressive behavior (self-disclosure and uninhibited behavior) in both synchronous computer-mediated and face-to-face discussions. (For comparison purposes, we also examined these effects under high- and low-evaluation anxiety). Communicating by computer did not influence physiological arousal, and it did not change emotions or self-evaluations. However, people who communicated by computer evaluated each other less favorably than did people who communicated face-to-face, they felt and acted as though the setting was more impersonal, and their behavior was more uninhibited. These findings suggest that computer-mediated communication, rather than provoking emotionality per se, elicits asocial or unregulated behavior. Of course, our data are based on a laboratory experiment using just one type of computer-mediated communication, but the results are generally consistent with anecdotal evidence and new field research on how people use computers to communicate in organizations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cognitive, social, and physiological determinants of emotional state.
Schachter, S., & Singer, J. (1962) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0046234 · Cited by 6,223
Social 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
Self-citation
Cited by
The Mutual Knowledge Problem and Its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration
Cramton, C. D. (2001) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.12.3.346.10098 · Cited by 1,916
Word of mouth communication within online communities: conceptualizing the online social network
Brown, J., Broderick, A. J., & Lee, N. (2007) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1002/dir.20082 · Cited by 1,661
Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: The role of self-awareness and visual anonymity
Joinson, A. N. (2001) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.36 · Cited by 1,458
The role of emotion in computer-mediated communication: A review
Derks, D., Fischer, A. H., & Bos, A. E. R. (2008) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.04.004 · Cited by 865
Panacea or Panopticon?: The Hidden Power in Computer-Mediated Communication
SPEARS, R., & LEA, M. (1994) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/009365094021004001 · Cited by 705
Metadata
- Authors
- Kiesler, S., Zubrow, D., Moses, A. M., & Geller, V.
- Venue
- Human–Computer Interaction
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1985-03
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 77-104
- ISSN
- 0737-0024 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7051
- OpenAlex
- W2155026712
- Cited by
- 367
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 8.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.