Posted by pullmarine on October 12, 2000, at 1:48:13
In reply to Hypotheses about Online Text Communication, posted by Dr. Bob on October 5, 2000, at 10:09:11
> 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)Overall True. but people might also not write things they feel guilty about, since it leaves a permanent document.
>
> 2. A person's writing style reflects aspects of their personality, and changes in it reflect changes in their thoughts and feelings. (6.1)
>
Possibly. But I think you're on a slippery slope. people may change style on purpose without a change in mood or thoughts. How will you distinguishh the two.?> 3. The "handle" a person chooses reflects aspects of their personality. (6.4)
>
not sure what you mean> 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)
part a. I don't agree.
part b. definitly. In fact, i think hospital patients should be given access to the net.
>
> B. Positive aspects
>
> 1. The act of writing fosters self-expression, self-reflection, and cognitive restructuring. (1.2)
>
Definatly yes for the first two. in some for the 3rd point.> 2. Online text communication that does not take place in "real time" enhances impulse control, self-reflection, and cognitive assimilation. (4.1)
>
Agreed.> 3. Receiving online text communications from others can promote the development of steady, supportive, reality-testing, ego-building "internal voices". (1.7, 4.4)
>
Not always true. for instance. I've seen some responses to suicidal people which I consider to be criminal. People with no training in suicide prevention can do a great deal of damage.> 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)
>
yes, but it also helps knowing that you can be of help to others.> 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)
Only for outliers, but they should be removed from your sample.
>
> 6. Online text communication can desensitize a person to social interaction and build social skills. (7.4, 7.5)
>online communication can also isolate people from real social interaction.
> 7. Access to online information tends to be empowering and transformative. (7.10)
Depends on the information. Overall, i would say no. Besides. the info on the net is not always reliable.
> C. Negative aspects
>
> 1. Online text communication is more subject to "simple" misunderstandings and conscious and unconscious distortions of meaning or intent. (2.1)
>
Disagree. because it's written, the cognitive and emotional processes at hand reduce the likelyhood of misunderstandings,and this, despite the absence of tones and facial expressions, body language, etc.> 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 and not true. the permanace of these records and the possibility of being identified will reduce this for many taboo issues.> 2. With online text communication, a person can be less inhibited and -- deliberately or not -- more likely to act out. (2.2)
>
not clear.> 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)
>
in some respects, yes. in other respects, no.
>
4. Ambivalence about intimacy can be expressed as a preference for online text communication and its blend of openness and distance. (2.3)
definitly. But it does not replace intimacy. in some ways, it's better.
> 5. Saved text can reduce errors in recall -- or be taken out of context, distorting its meaning. (3.2, 3.3)mostly yes >
> 6. With online text communication, others try to help more quickly by giving advice or problem-solving. (11.2)depends. other can also add fuel toa fire.
>
> 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)I disagree. what would be usefull would be MH workers checking some of the info, and providing feedback regarding the accuracy of some of the statements.
what would be useful, if not a necessity, would be a list of suicide prevention do's and don'ts at the begining of such web-sites.
>
> 2. Online support groups tend to be less cohesive. (10.3)
>
no shit!> 3. In online support groups, a person can explore and experiment with different "identities" at the same time. (10.7)
>
absolutly! but is it healthy?> 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)does not apply.
poster:pullmarine
thread:844
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20001011/msgs/999.html