Posted by shellie on October 13, 2000, at 12:21:08
In reply to Hypotheses about Online Text Communication, posted by Dr. Bob on October 5, 2000, at 10:09:11
>
> --------------------------------
>
> Hypotheses about Online Text Communication
>
> A. Characteristics of online text communication
>
> 1. A person with a history of chaotic relationships, physical trauma, or strong feelings of shame or guilt tends to experience online text communication as safe. (1.3, 1.4, 2.4)
>
I would say initially more safe, but then things can come up which make them feel less safe than they originally felt. e.g., initial support that turns into criticism.
> 2. A person's writing style reflects aspects of their personality, and changes in it reflect changes in their thoughts and feelings. (6.1)
>
probably true.> 3. The "handle" a person chooses reflects aspects of their personality. (6.4)
I would have to say yes; maybe there is a difference between first name people and last name people, and other than idea as name people.
>
> 4. If a person has a web site, it reflects aspects of their personality. Having others visit it and visiting those of others is emotionally significant. (7.6)emotionally significant? I would say a web site reflects aspects of their personality, but visiting them for me is not emotionally significant.
>
> B. Positive aspects
>
> 1. The act of writing fosters self-expression, self-reflection, and cognitive restructuring. (1.2)
agree
> 2. Online text communication that does not take place in "real time" enhances impulse control, self-reflection, and cognitive assimilation. (4.1)I would say perhaps enhances self-reflection and cognitive association, but I'm not sure about impulse control. Do you mean from self-harm? Maybe. But writing on the internet can be an immediate action that makes expressive impulse control, not necessary. i.e., someone can repond with anger on the internet without waiting until the next day and realizing expressing the anger in that way is not appropriate.
> 3. Receiving online text communications from others can promote the development of steady, supportive, reality-testing, ego-building "internal voices". (1.7, 4.4)
of course it can, but don't think it is a big factor
>
> 4. The opportunity to send online text communications to others, even before --- or without -- any replies, can help a person feel the others are available. (4.3)without replies one can feel more isolated; with replies, I would agree.
> 5. A person can use online text communication as a way to explore and experiment with new behaviors or different aspects of their identity. What they learn or rehearse online can be carried into their offline life. (7.2, 7.3)
>
don't think so.> 6. Online text communication can desensitize a person to social interaction and build social skills. (7.4, 7.5)
>
disagree, online and inperson is too different; there are not as many consequences for online. (e.g.," if you don't do what I want on your board, I'll leave and go to another board or start my own board."> 7. Access to online information tends to be empowering and transformative. (7.10)
definitely empowering. It's good to go to my pdoc with a good sense of what's out there for depression, what are possible side effects, etc., for example. Transformative, I would say rarely, but possibly.
> C. Negative aspects
>
> 1. Online text communication is more subject to "simple" misunderstandings and conscious and unconscious distortions of meaning or intent. (2.1)probably, but not to a significant degree. You can always, respond to clarify meaning-it just might take a bit longer.
>
> D. Potentially positive or negative aspects
>
> 1. With online text communication, a person can be less inhibited and -- deliberately or not -- more open about aspects of themselves, including their "true self". (2.2, 6.2, 7.1)
> true
> 2. With online text communication, a person can be less inhibited and -- deliberately or not -- more likely to act out. (2.2)
true because there are fewer consequences.
>
> 3. With online text communication, a person can be -- deliberately or not -- more guarded about aspects of themselves, including their "true self". (6.3, 8.4)disagree, usually not more guarded about true self. If true self is depressed, it's easier, (or maybe more appropriate) to express on the internet, rather than to an aquaintance.
>
> 4. Ambivalence about intimacy can be expressed as a preference for online text communication and its blend of openness and distance. (2.3)
absolutely. Probably your most important hypothesis.
>
> 5. Saved text can reduce errors in recall -- or be taken out of context, distorting its meaning. (3.2, 3.3)
I'm pretty sure it would do more to reduce errors in recall.
>
> 6. With online text communication, others try to help more quickly by giving advice or problem-solving. (11.2)
true
>
> E. Online support groups
>
> 1. Online support groups benefit from having rules about appropriate behavior, effective enforcement of those rules, and knowledgeable and confident leaders. (10.1)
>
true
> 2. Online support groups tend to be less cohesive. (10.3)
>
true
> 3. In online support groups, a person can explore and experiment with different "identities" at the same time. (10.7)could, but I don't know how many people do. Seems like a small percentage.
>
> F. Therapy
>
> 1. Differences in status are less apparent in online text communication. Clinicians tend to be perceived less as authorities and more as consultants or even "twins". (11.4)Depends on the sophistication of the population. On one site, when an identified psychologist responds, it is taken much more as "authority" than other peers. I don't know if that would happen on this site.
poster:shellie
thread:844
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20001011/msgs/1031.html