| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision |
| side [2017/06/01 08:46] – [Theory] hkimscil | side [2017/06/01 08:53] (current) – hkimscil |
|---|
| * Social Identity Theory | * Social Identity Theory |
| * Self-categorization Theory | * Self-categorization Theory |
| | |
| | Three Perspectives on Relating Online |
| | ^ Perspective ^ Claim ^ Relationships ^ |
| | | Impersonal | The lack of cues limits \\ the quality of interaction. | Relationships are unlikely to \\ emerge in CMC. | |
| | | Interpersonal | Learned behaviors can help \\ compensate for the lack of cues | Relationships can emerge \\ in CMC | |
| | | Hyperpersonal | The lack of nonverbal \\ discriminators actually helps \\ some find their voice | For some, the ability to relate \\ is more substantial in CMC | |
| |
| * Wood, Andrew F. and Matthew J. Smith. Online Communication: Linking Technology, Identity, and Culture. Second Edition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2005. Chapter 4, “Relating Online” (78-100) {{:Online Communication Linking Technology Identity and Cult 2005.pdf|PDF}} | * Wood, Andrew F. and Matthew J. Smith. Online Communication: Linking Technology, Identity, and Culture. Second Edition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2005. Chapter 4, “Relating Online” (78-100) {{:Online Communication Linking Technology Identity and Cult 2005.pdf|PDF}} |
| * Postmes, T., Spears, R., Lee, A. T., & Novak, R. J. (2005). Individuality and Social Influence in Groups: Inductive and Deductive Routes to Group Identity. __Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89__(5), 747-763. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.89.5.747 | * Postmes, T., Spears, R., Lee, A. T., & Novak, R. J. (2005). Individuality and Social Influence in Groups: Inductive and Deductive Routes to Group Identity. __Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89__(5), 747-763. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.89.5.747 |
| |
| ====== 발췌 ====== | ====== Walther's interpersonal communication in CMC ====== |
| <WRAP col3> | <WRAP col3> |
| The social identity model of deindividuation effects, or SIDE model, has had an interesting evolution in the literature. Although its developers have argued that it is decidedly not about interpersonal communication, at least in terms of the mechanisms that generate its predictions (e.g., Postmes & Baym, 2005), it has been applied to many settings that appear to be interpersonal in nature. At one point, SIDE was one of the most dominant theories of CMC. Changes to the theory in response to empirical challenges and changes in communication technology?attributes that bear on the theory’s central assumptions?appear to have accompanied a marginal decline in its popularity and scope. In certain contexts, however, it remains a most parsimonious and robust explanatory framework for CMC dynamics. | The social identity model of deindividuation effects, or SIDE model, has had an interesting evolution in the literature. Although its developers have argued that it is decidedly not about interpersonal communication, at least in terms of the mechanisms that generate its predictions (e.g., Postmes & Baym, 2005), it has been applied to many settings that appear to be interpersonal in nature. At one point, SIDE was one of the most dominant theories of CMC. Changes to the theory in response to empirical challenges and changes in communication technology?attributes that bear on the theory’s central assumptions?appear to have accompanied a marginal decline in its popularity and scope. In certain contexts, however, it remains a most parsimonious and robust explanatory framework for CMC dynamics. |
