Content uploaded by Joseph B. Walther
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Joseph B. Walther on Dec 11, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
24
NONVERBAL DYNAMICS IN
COMPUTER-MEDIATED
COMMUNICATION,
OR
: (
AND THE NET
:(
'S WITH
YOU,
:)
AND YOU
:)
ALONE
I
t may seem ironic, at first glance, to review research on nonverbal
communication in the realm of computer-mediated communication
(CMC)
. A considerable history of theory and research suggests that CMC
differs from face-to-face (FtF) communication precisely on account of the
lack
of nonverbal cues in the new medium, and, that as a result, CMC
offers meager social meaning and limited value
. As is known to the blind
and deaf, who cannot use all the cues that those with sight and hearing
can use, or to distant lovers, who depend on written letters to express
their love, however, this chapter will show that there are indeed a variety
of cues and adaptations for affective and comprehensible communication
when a larger set of cues is unavailable, even in the textually oriented mode
of CMC
. Specifically, some nonverbal cues-those involving chronemics-
traverse CMC and are quite potent
. As well, textual symbols-emoticons-
that are presumed to work as surrogates for nonverbal cues are widely
•
~
461
462
•
Contexts and Consequences
known and easily recognized although their
utility
is
questionable
.
The limited research on extant nonverbal
cues or their substitutes, as well as emerging
research on specific reintroductions of non-
verbal features through avatars, videocon-
ferencing, and virtual reality systems is
leading to a more functionally oriented per-
spective on mediated human communica-
tion
. Newer research is focusing on what
people communicate, and the variety of
means by which to do so, some of which
means were considered previously the exclu-
sive domain of nonverbal cues
. As a result, a
major consequence of contemporary CMC
research is to help us learn more about com-
munication symbol systems and their func-
tions in general, by observing both their
absence and their systematic replacement
.
This chapter reviews the major theories
and their research traditions on CMC and
the similarities and differences among them
with respect to how the relative absence of
nonverbal cues may affect communication
and social perceptions
. As will be argued,
most of these approaches have relegated
nonverbal communication to a "black box,"
in a kind of all-or-nothing fashion, assum-
ing that all nonverbal cues lead to a variety
of functions, and that the cues and func-
tions are isomorphic
(i
.e
., that nonverbal
cues are tied directly and exclusively to
communicative social functions, such that
the absence of such cues precludes func-
tional effects from occurring)
.
The chapter then discusses the potency
of chronemics in CMC (e
.g
.,
alternative
temporal scales, time pressure, and the
implicit and explicit effects of timing cues
on interpersonal judgments online)
. It turns
next to a variety of ways in which users or
technology designers attempt to reintro-
duce nonverbal cues into CMC or other
electronic communication systems
. Finally,
considering exemplary approaches to online
deception and some research employing
virtual reality systems, we see that future
theoretical and technological development
requires more exacting research on nonver-
bal communication in an area once thought
to be devoid of such features
.
•
~
Hypothesizing About the
"Lack" o f Nonverbal Cues
in Early CMC Theories
SOCIAL PRESENCE THEORY
The earliest predictions applied to CMC
stressed the depersonalizing, predominantly
negative effects of communication without
nonverbal cues
. The first of these theories
was social presence theory (Short, Williams,
& Christie, 1976), the original treatment of
which is noteworthy for its comprehensive
treatment of the role of nonverbal cues
in communication
. Originally focused on
video- and audioconferencing, its theoreti-
cal specifications have also been applied to
text-only communication (Hiltz, Johnson,
& Agle, 1978
; Rice, 1984
; Rice & Case,
1983)
. The theory deals with decrements in
interpersonal affect as communication
systems incrementally reduce the cue
systems that users may employ
. Thus, as
communicators shift from FtF to videocon-
ferencing, many proxemic, as well as
haptic, cues are unavailable
. Moving
to audioconferencing, kinesics and any
remaining proxemic cues are also removed
.
Short et al
. (1976) equate the uses or
absence of these cue systems with the
degree of "social presence" that communi-
cators may experience, positing that social
presence declines as the number of cue
systems declines
. Social presence, in turn,
is conceptualized as the communicator's
involvement with the target of the conver-
sation, and it is associated with warmth
and friendliness
. Many studies have sup-
ported the premises of social presence
theory (for review, see Walther & Parks,
2002), although it has also received much
criticism insofar as its application to CMC
is concerned
(e .g
.,
Lea, 1991
; Walther,
1992)
.
THE LACK OF
SOCIAL
CONTEXT CUES HYPOTHESIS
A similar perspective to social presence
theory is the lack of social context cues
hypothesis (Kiesler, 1987
; Kiesler, Siegel, &
McGuire, 1984
; Siegel, Dubrovsky, Kiesler,
& McGuire, 1986
; Sproull & Kiesler,1986)
.
This position argues that nonverbal cues in
FtF settings establish the social context of
interaction, and with the awareness of social
context, participants infer and perform
normative behavior
. Without social context
cues, participants are deindividuated and
thus behave aberrantly, including being
self- rather than other-focused, task-
oriented, and disinhibited
. These states lead
not only to colder and more task-oriented
communication, it is argued, but also to
engage in "flaming" (name-calling, swearing,
or other uninhibited expressions) online and
more attitude polarization
. This position, like
social presence theory, suggests that the
absence of nonverbal cues is the causal factor
distinguishing FtF and online interaction
.
MEDIA
RICHNESS
A third theory also regards the differ-
ences among media and their effects due to
the range of nonverbal cue systems media
carry, although media richness theory (Daft
& Lengel, 1984, 1986) differs from the pre-
vious positions in three important respects
.
First, although the number of cue systems
supported is a primary difference among
communication media in this theory, cue
systems are joined by three other elements
in differentiating media capacity
: the ability
to personalize messages
(i
.e
.,
to tailor mes-
sages for a specific recipient), the capacity
Nonverbal Dynamics in Computer-Mediated Communication
•
4
6
3
to use natural and varied language, and
the extent to which message exchanges
offer immediate feedback
(i
.e
.,
sender and
receiver exchanges are bidirectional, or
they are asynchronous and responses are
delayed)
. Together, these dimensions define
"media richness
."
The
second
important
difference
between this theory and the others is the
specification regarding the predicted effec-
tiveness and efficiency of richer versus
leaner media when considering the degree
of equivocality and uncertainty involved in
the communication task
. Thus, for highly
equivocal tasks, richer media are posited to
be more efficient, whereas for simpler tasks,
although a rich or lean medium might be
equally as effective, a leaner medium may
be more efficient (Daft & Lengel, 1984)
.
For instance, to ask a colleague what time a
meeting is scheduled to take place, one may
go down the hallway FtF, but a phone call
or e-mail would work as well, possibly
more quickly, and with less effort
.
The third difference is that, whereas this
theory, like others, places a premium on
nonverbal and other aspects of communica-
tive flexibility, it stresses the role of multiple
cues as sources to facilitate the
comprehen-
sion
of information rather than as a source
of individuation, social presence, or social
context
. In media richness theory, the avail-
ability of nonverbal cues (without differen-
tiation) and other communication system
attributes are expected to help make media,
and messages, richer, leading to the reduc-
tion of equivocality in shorter periods of
time
. Although interpersonal effects have
been imputed as derivatives of this theory
(Markus, 1994), the original formulation of
the theory makes no such claim
.
OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY
As a group, all three of these theories sug-
gest a "black box" approach to the role of
4
64
•
Contexts and Consequences
nonverbal cues in communication
. They
each seem to assume that if the capacity
to exhibit and detect the use of nonverbal
codes is supported by alternative media,
users will be or must be using these codes
and attending to them, without privileging
one code over another
. They also presume,
as some critiques have suggested (Culnan
& Markus, 1987), that there is a one-to-one
correspondence between nonverbal codes
and the social functions with which they are
associated (e
.g
.,
increases in close proximity,
gaze, and touch always mean intimacy
and never mean threat)
. Moreover, there
appears to be an assumption that nonverbal
codes have a monotonic, additive associa-
tion with those functions
(i
.e
.,
the more
codes that may be used, or the more codes
that will be used, the more warm or under-
standable a given communication episode
will be)
. The perspectives do not consider
that the more cue systems available, or by
the use of text alone, for that matter, the
better communicators may be able to reach
intended
or
desired
levels of affect, even if
those targets are homeostasis (Danchak,
Walther, & Swan, 2001) or, as later CMC
research has shown, disaffiliation and psy-
chological distance from others (Douglas &
McGarty,'2001
; Markus, 1994
; O'Sullivan,
2000
; Walther, Loh, & Granka, 2005
;
Walther, Slovacek, & Tidwell, 2001)
. Other
models do, however, consider the potential
for cues of all kinds-multimodal or text
alone-to affect relationships differentially
.
•
~
Adaptation Theories
SOCIAL IDENTIFICATION MODEL
OF DEINDIVIDUATION EFFECTS
The next theory discussed is not associ-
ated traditionally with the above cues-
filtered-out perspective, because it specifies
socially oriented responses to the lack of
nonverbal cues in CMC
. But it relies on an
assumption that nonverbal cues, and there-
fore their individuating identification func-
tions, are occluded by electronic text
systems
. SIDE, or the social identification
model of deindividuation effects (see for
review Postmes, Spears, Lea, & Reicher,
2000) is derived from the social identifica-
tion/self-categorization theory (see Hogg
& Abrams, 1988), which holds that people
often identify on the basis of common
group membership, or ingroup and out-
group identifications, and that certain
contextual factors encourage or discourage
these forms of identification
.
SIDE theorists argue that the process
of CMC interaction often facilitates group
identification
: There may be a salient group
or social category associated with an online
interaction event, and, most important with
respect to nonverbal cues, communicators
operate under visual anonymity and are
therefore deindividuated
. Because they do
not see that they differ from one another
idiosyncratically, as would be apparent FtF,
they are more likely to experience their part-
ners and interpret others' behavior as reflect-
ing group norms, which they value and to
which they themselves then adhere
. Both
SIDE and the lack of social context cues
approaches argue that the reintroduction of
visual cues ameliorates deindividuation
.
The SIDE model is more specific with
respect to visual cues than are other tradi-
tions
. SIDE research has looked at both
between-media
and
within-media
varia-
tions
. That is, not only have SIDE dynamics
been supported in comparisons between
CMC and FtF conditions, but they have
also been found between CMC alone and
CMC in a room where people can see
one another (Lea & Spears, 1992), CMC
with only text compared with CMC with
a photo of one's partners (see Postmes,
Spears, & Lea, 1998), and CMC alone
versus CMC plus videoconferencing (Lea,
Spears, & de Groot,
2001)
.
With respect
to nonverbal cues, however, SIDE treats all
visual cues the same theoretically
. No dif-
ferentiation is made on the basis of whether
visual cues are dynamic (as in videocon-
ferencing) or static (as in photographs)
.
Within SIDE, the function of visual infor-
mation is to cue individuating identifi-
cations, whereas its absence can promote
immersion in group identity
. Like the previ-
ous positions reviewed, SIDE treats text-
based CMC as bereft of cues about the
individuals using it and asserts that without
visual information, users do not identify
with one another as individuals
. From this
perspective, it is only possible to achieve
interpersonal relationships online by intro-
ducing visual, individuating nonverbal cues
such as photographs or video (Rogers &
Lea,
2004)
.
In contrast to previous theories,
according to SIDE, the outcome of the dein-
dividuated, nonvisual state may be proso-
cial (raising attraction and evaluations of
partners relative to FtF interaction), or it
can increase bias and intergroup denigra-
tion (Douglas & McGarry, 2001
;
Lea
et al
.,
2001
;
Postmes et al
., 1998
; Postmes
& Spears,
2002)
.
HYPERPERSONAL CMC
One additional model of CMC interac-
tion also places the absence of physical cues
as a causal factor in explaining the differ-
ences between CMC and FtF communica-
tion
. The hyperpersonal model of CMC
strived originally to explain how CMC
interactions may lead to levels of intimacy
and social orientation exceeding those of
FtF interactions in parallel social contexts
(Walther, 1996), but it has been expanded
to predict both hyperpositive and hyperneg-
ative outcomes (Walther et al
.,
2001)
.
Like the SIDE model, the hyperpersonal
Nonverbal Dynamics in Computer-Mediated Communication
•
46
5
framework acknowledges that receivers
stereotype and idealize their partners when
they receive messages without the informa-
tion about the partner's idiosyncratic char-
acteristics (although the hyperpersonal
model does not dictate group- or categori-
cal-level stereotypes
; Walther, 1997)
. The
hyperpersonal model also considers the ide-
alizing potential of CMC that eliminates
potentially undesirable
dynamic
nonverbal
behavior, such as interruptions and other
distracting vocalizations, unconventional
gaze patterns, and unattractive physical
appearance characteristics (Walther &
Parks,
2002),
although these particular
elements have not yet been tested
.
Beyond perceptions of partners, how-
ever, the reduction of nonverbal cues in
CMC is pivotal in other specifications
of hyperpersonal interaction
. One is that
senders, in the process of message construc-
tion, engage in selective self-presentation to
a degree not afforded in FtF interaction
.
Because many nonverbal cues are more dif-
ficult to control (from body shape and
other physical appearance features, vocalic
attributes, to kinesic behaviors that are less
consciously controlled) compared with ver-
bal behaviors, CMC users can create more
intentional messages and avoid uninten-
tional cues . The ability to edit text messages
enhances this effect (Walther, in press)
.
Finally, as the CMC process frees users
from needing to attend to one's own non-
verbal behavior, as well as attending to
partners' nonverbal affect, information, or
conversation management cues, CMC
users recapture cognitive resources that
would normally be allocated to those
processes and apply them instead to mes-
sage creation, allowing for further expres-
sive selectivity
.
Empirical investigations have supported
several aspects of this model
. In a test of
self-presentation, CMC dyads exchanged
more self-disclosure and more intimate
4 66
•
Contexts and Consequences
personal
questions
in
an
online
"get-to-
know-you"
session than did FtF partners,
who relied to a greater extent on environ-
mental characteristics, physical attributes,
and kinesic behaviors to reduce uncertainty
about their partners (Tidwell & Walther,
2002)
.
In a direct test of the impact of facial
photographs as a benefit or detriment to
hyperpersonal online relationship forma-
tion, Walther et al
.
(2001)
employed
groups, half of which had interacted via
CMC over several tasks, whereas members
of the other half were unknown to one
another
. In each of these conditions, half of
them experienced the presence or absence
of photographs of their partners'
faces
immediately prior to a chat
. Results showed
that those who came to know one another
online and did
not
see each other's pictures
rated their partners as more affectionate
and socially attractive, but the introduction
of photos reduced attraction among those
who were familiar with each other only
online
. Only among strangers, a photo
enhanced affection and social attraction
relative to no photo
. Moreover, interesting
correlations emerged between participants'
self-reported impression management efforts
and ratings of their physical attractiveness
by partners
. When there was no photo,
physical attractiveness ratings were posi-
tively correlated with self-presentation
efforts, but when pictures were shown, self-
presentation effort and physical attractive-
ness were negatively correlated
. When one's
photo shows, the more one tries to enhance
one's impression, the worse it seems to get
(Walther et al
.,
2001)
.
The hyperpersonal perspective may be the
most specific CMC framework with respect
to the role of nonverbal communication and
its functions in FtF interaction, and how they
are transformed online
. Not all dimensions
of the model have been tested directly, and
the model is less specific about the kinds of
partners for which hyperpersonal processes
should be expected to adhere, drawing on
other theories to create contexts in which
these dynamics emerge
.
SOCIAL INFORMATION
PROCESSING
A final theoretical model of CMC
employs a different perspective on the rela-
tionship between nonverbal cues offline
and text-only CMC
. The social information
processing theory (SIP ; Walther,
1992)
argues that impression-bearing and rela-
tional functions, for which communicators
rely on nonverbal cues FtF, are translated
into verbal content, linguistic, stylistic, and
chronemic cues in the CMC environment
.
Given that all functions-task, social, and
otherwise-must be conveyed through the
single conduit of text, it may take more
messages, over a longer time, to imbue
exchanges with sufficient information for
participants to decode and aggregate in
order to construct impressions and manage
relationships
. Add to this slowdown that
CMC messages may be exchanged in fits
and spurts intermittently (as in e-mail)
and even further retardation of evolving
social dynamics is expected relative to FtF
processes
. Central to SIP, however, is the
premise that all other things being equal,
CMC is as capable as FtF communication
of sharing impressions and managing rela-
tional communication, based on the substi-
tutability of verbal and nonverbal cues in
the service of social functions
.
This premise is disconcerting to those
who hold that there is unique value to non-
verbal cues that cannot be replaced
. Indeed,
Jones and LeBaron's
(2002)
review of non-
verbal communication literature concluded
that it has been assumed that "verbal and
nonverbal behaviors are generally different
kinds of messages with rather different
meanings and potential functions" (p
. 501)
.
SIP, on the other hand, argues that infor-
mation is information and that it can be
Nonverbal Dynamics in Computer-Mediated Communication
•
4
6 7
expressed through a variety of modalities
.
Like media richness theory (Daft & Lengel,
1984), SIP acknowledges that written cues
alone may be less efficient within a given
time interval compared with a simultane-
ously multimodal
(i .e
.,
kinesic, vocalic,
and verbal) exchange, but given sufficient
time and exchange, the two systems may
be functionally equivalent, and CMC users
make these adaptations fluidly
.
The SIP theory has been supported in
several empirical studies (for review, see
Walther & Parks, 2002)
. For instance, Liu,
Ginther, and Zelhart (2002) found that
impression development in CMC was sensi-
tive to both the length of e-mail messages
and the frequency of e-mail messages from a
partner over time, and Walther and Burgoon
(1992) found that relational communica-
tion levels changed more or less in parallel
between CMC and FtF groups in response to
time accrual rather than to the differences
between communication conditions (see
also Chidambaram & Bostrom, 1993)
.
These studies lend credence to the model's
causal factors and predicted effects
; they did
not examine the microprocesses implicated
by the theory-that is, the substitution of
verbal cues in the service of functions for
which nonverbal cues are employed offline
.
A recent study addressed this gap by
assessing the specific behaviors in alternative
channels that express affinity
. Walther et al
.'s
(2005) experiment employed decision-
making dyads meeting FtF or via synchro-
nous computer chat
. One member was
prompted to enact greater or lesser levels of
liking toward his or her partner after an ini-
tial interaction period, by whatever way he
or she chose to display the affect . The other
dyad partner rated the ad hoc confederates'
performance on perceived immediacy and
affection
. Coders rated kinesic cues from
videotapes of the FtF confederates and
independently rated the vocalic perfor-
mances as heard through a content-filtering
device
. Additional coders analyzed both FtF
and CMC transcripts for verbal indications
of affinity
. Regression analyses of the cues
in both conditions were used to identify the
variations in cues and channels that most
strongly predicted the variations in partner
ratings of affect
. As expected, that FtF part-
ners expressed affinity through nonverbal
cues primarily, with vocalic cues (pleasant-
ness, vocal sharpness, vocal condescension,
and timber) predominating over kinesics
;
verbal cues were not significantly associated
with FtF liking in comparison with these
nonverbal variations
. In CMC conversa-
tions, however, an equivalent proportion
of the variance in liking was accomplished
through verbal behaviors (explicit verbal
statements of affection, changing the
subject, and various forms of disagree-
ment), demonstrating comparability and
substitutability of verbal cues in CMC for
vocalic and kinesic cues in FtF interaction
.
SUMMARY
The major theories of CMC each portray
significant effects of the reduction of non-
verbal cues online
. Positions range from the
austere, early formulations, where nonver-
bal cues were isomorphic with certain com-
municative functions, to the more adaptive
models of hyperpersonal CMC and SIP, in
which users exploit or work through the rel-
ative lack of nonverbal cues
. Cutting across
these models, other research has focused on
specific cues-natural or stylized-and the
degree to which CMC users adapt affective
meaning to their usage
.
•
~
The Cues That
Remain
: Chronemics
Whereas physical behavior, voice, space,
and appearance cues are indeed absent in
text-based CMC, the chronemic cue system
4
6
8
•
Contexts and Consequences
remains,
although
it is frequently over-
looked in descriptions of CMC's nonver-
bal capacity
. Hesse, Werner, and Altman
(1988) were among the first to recognize
the potential for temporal dynamics and
cues to play a significant role in CMC,
noting potential departures from traditional
interaction patterns in terms of temporal
scale (the temporal scope and duration of
events and relationships), the sequencing of
actions, the pace, and the salience of past,
present, or future issues in ongoing CMC
interactions
. Although several studies can
now be said to address some of these issues,
few of them have noted Hesse et al
.'s origi-
nal thinking
.
Among those studies examining tem-
poral factors in CMC, chronemic dynamics
are potent forces in the experience of
CMC users
. As Kalman and Rafaeli
(2005) observed, for example, "One of the
unknowns of emailing is the time it will
take the receiver to form and post a reply
.
Response times vary considerably, and
the chronemics of email are an important
non-verbal cue which can convey meaning"
(p
. 1)
. According to Rice (1990), e-mail
users attend to the time stamps that are
placed on messages automatically, inferring
from them when a message was sent and
how much latency occurred before one of
their own messages received a reply
.
Temporal dynamics affect virtual groups
in a variety of ways, although specific
chronemic cues may or may not play a role
in these effects
. Orlikowski and Yates
(2002) found that virtual groups' activity
cycles became oriented more toward critical
events, such as the occasional exchange of
collaborative documents, than toward the
influence of predetermined deadlines
. In
a field study of organizational CMC,
Steinfield (1986) found that CMC becomes
more task oriented and less socially ori-
ented as collaborators get closer to project
deadlines
. In a closer inspection of time
pressure and CMC, Reid and colleagues
(Reid, Ball, Morley, & Evans, 1997
; Reid,
Malinek, Stott, & Evans, 1996) determined
that the relational tone of CMC is more
sensitive to time scarcity than is FtF inter-
action
: In CMC groups, more than in
FtF groups, discourse became less rational,
and less affective content appeared, as pres-
sure increased with shorter time limits
.
Conversely, it appears that a
long
duration
of time spent in CMC with a partner is
inferred as a token of relational intimacy
(Henderson & Gilding, 2004)
.
Response latencies are another familiar
chronemic characteristic, and their effects
have been studied in several CMC contexts
.
Members make biased attributions for
response delays, assuming personal rather
than situational causes for lags by distant
team members (Cramton, 2001)
. Failure
to get responses may erode initial levels of
trust in virtual groups (Jarvenpaa, Knoll, &
Leidner, 1998), and frequent messaging is
noted consistently as a critical factor in
virtual group trust, affective relations, and
effectiveness (Walther & Bunz, 2005), espe-
cially with regard to partners' replies to
an individual's conversational initiations or
requests (Iacono & Weisband, 1997)
.
Latencies also have mixed effects in dyadic,
synchronous CMC
.
In organizational
settings where members use Instant Messen-
ger, a query that goes without a response is
frequently attributed to one's partner being
busy (Nardi, Whittaker, & Bradner, 2000)
.
In social chatting, however, individuals
who find themselves waiting for replies
grow increasingly frustrated if not hostile
(Rintel & Pittam, 1997
; see also Feenberg,
1989)
.
One study tested the interpersonal impres-
sions affected by variations in e-mail response
latency, as well as whether messages were
sent at night or during the day (Walther &
Tidwell, 1995)
. Researchers created several
pairs of e-mail message facsimiles featuring an
initial message and a reply that appeared to be
initiated by a vice president and replied to by
Nonverbal Dynamics in Computer-Mediated Communication
•
469
a manager who were separated geographi-
cally within a corporation
. The time stamps
on these e-mail facsimiles made one pair
appear to have been sent shortly after 10 a
.m
.
and another pair after 10 p
.m
. This factor was
crossed by the apparent response lag . In some
pairs, the reply seemed to occur several min-
utes after the initial message
; alternatively, 24
hours and several minutes appeared to have
elapsed
. The time stamps were further crossed
over two kinds of message exchanges, a task-
oriented request versus social banter
.
Ratings of these various stimuli con-
firmed chronemics-based hypotheses
. When
task messages were sent at night the sender
was rated highest on dominance compared
with the same message sent during the day
.
The pattern was opposite for social mes-
sages, which signaled more dominance by
day than at night . The amount of affection
ascribed to a sender's message was affected
by an interaction between day and night, the
promptness of the reply, and the thematic
content
. The most affection accorded to
task exchanges occurred when there was a
quick reply to a daytime request, and the
least affection was associated with a prompt
response to a nighttime message
. As for
social messages, more affection was per-
ceived in a slower reply to a daytime mes-
sage than a fast reply, but a fast reply at
night showed more affection than a slow
one
. Consistent with Hall's (1959) observa-
tions about FtF speech lags, it appears that
expectations of quick e-mail replies are
relaxed within established social relation-
ships, although reactions to response latency
are quite different within impersonal rela-
tions, both online and offline
.
•
Reintroducing Cues
Whereas chronemic cues have always been
available, thus countering the ideas that
nonverbal cues are lacking from CMC, new
and emerging technologies selectively rein-
troduce additional cues into communicative
exchanges among people who do not meet
FtF
. Whether executed by users or technol-
ogy designers, these developments and their
impacts inform nonverbal communication
principles
.
CUE SURROGATES
: EMOTICONS
A considerable amount of attention has
been devoted to the use of "emoticons" in
CMC
. Emoticons are the presentation of
keyboard symbols used in such manner as
to resemble facial expressions
. They are
assumed widely to express emotion and are
frequently described as emotional surro-
gates in CMC for facial expressions and
other nonverbal cues to emotion
. "Because
the use of e-mail eliminates visual cues such
as head nodding, facial expressions, pos-
ture, and eye contact found in FtF commu-
nication, CMC users often incorporate
emoticons as visual cues to augment the
meaning of textual electronic messages"
(Rezabek & Cochenour, 1998, pp
. 201-
202)
. The use of emoticons in CMC dates
back at least as far the early 1980s, and for
many years "smiley dictionaries" circulated
in the Internet, containing hundreds of vari-
ations and the verbal labels of their alleged
emotional equivalents (e
.g
.,
Godin, 1993
;
Sanderson, 1993)
. The best known of these
symbols are "a smile, wink, and frown,
respectively
:
:-) ;-)
:-(" (Danet, Ruedenberg-
Wright, & Rosenbaum-Tamari, 1997,
n
.p
.) .
These symbols are well recognized
within the CMC-using community
. Among
one college student sample, basic emoticons
were interpreted more reliably than were
photos of human facial expressions of emo-
tion
: Whereas Ekman and Friesen (1975)
report percentages of agreement about the
association of facial photos depicting basic
human emotions from 97% for happiness
to 67% for anger, Walther and D'Addario
4 7
0
•
Contexts and Consequences
(2001) found that the
:)
and
:(
emoticons
achieved
98%
consensus for happiness and
sadness, respectively, and associations of
other emoticons with anger, disgust, and
fear ranged from
88%
to
85%
.
Although the literature on emoticons
asserts frequently that they function as
nonverbal (facial) expressions, very little
research has examined the functional
impact of these symbols
. Most of the
research on emoticons has analyzed pat-
terns of their use based on demographic
factors
: Females use them more frequently
than do males (Witmer & Katzman,
1997)
and their usage even depends on which part
of the United States e-mail users reside
(Rezabek & Cochenour,
1998)
.
Walther
and D'Addario (2001) explored their func-
tional dynamics
. Reviewing the facial affect
literature, they derived hypotheses predict-
ing relationships between emoticons and
accompanying verbal messages on affective
message interpretation
. These relationships
included a variety of additive effects, by
which the emotional valence of the emoti-
con would be added to the emotional
valence of a verbal message, leading to sup-
plementation (for a positive emoticon plus
a positive verbal message, a negative emoti-
con plus a negative verbal message) or mod-
ification (a positive element plus a negative
"canceling out" or neutralizing overall
affect)
. Alternatively, visual primacy was
posited : An emoticon's valence might over-
ride that of the verbal statement
. The com-
bination of positive and negative messages,
among emoticon and verbal statements,
might also result in an interpretation of sar-
casm, as might the iconic
;)
or "winkie
."
In a 4 by 2 experimental procedure,
:)
;)
:(
or no emoticon were inserted alternately
in simulated e-mail message mock-ups that
contained either a positive or a negative
verbal statement about a college course
.
Participants viewed one of these mock-ups
and then rated the supposed message
sender's affective state and attitude about
the course
. There was very little effect of
emoticons on attitude and interpretation
;
what impact they did exhibit was not in
accord with the hypotheses from facial
expression research
. Specifically,
smiley
emoticons had no effect on message inter-
pretation whatsoever
.
Frown
emoticons
reduced the positivity of a positive verbal
message, but frowns did not affect interpre-
tations of negative verbal messages-that
is, did not make them even more negative
.
Overall, there appeared to be a negativity
effect
: When any negative message element
appeared, whether it was an emoticon or
a verbal statement, the interpretation was
negative
. Additionally, the combination of
verbal statements and their opposite emoti-
con were not significantly different in
sarcasm from other combinations
; only a
positive verbal message with a
;)
emoticon
was rated higher in sarcasm than other
combinations, suggesting that the wink
symbol has some iconic value in CMC but
that a negative verbal statement may over-
ride the emoticon effect
. Given that only
the frown emoticon affected meaning, it
appears to be the case that
: (
and the net
:(
's with you, but
:)
and you
:)
alone
.
AVATARS AND VIDEO
In addition to stylized affective cues such
as emoticons, developers and users explore
the utility of reintroducing certain visual
cues into distributed interaction
. This has
been done primarily through the use of
avatars, icons, and videoconferencing
.
Avatars
.
Avatars are two-dimensional
representations on a computer screen that
chat users can select and move around the
screen during online interaction
. Avatars
are used frequently in various multiplayer
computer games such as Everquest and the
Nonverbal Dynamics in Computer-Mediated Communication
•
4
7
1
SimsOnline, although they have a somewhat
longer history in multiuser chat spaces such
as the
Palace
(
w
ww
.thepalace
.com/
;
see
Suler,
1999)
.
In most environments, one
selects an avatar initially from among a
stock of available figures
. Avatars are often
cartoonish and range from very generic
with few distinguishing features to rather
elaborate in design
. It is also possible to
create an individual avatar using graphics
software or to craft an avatar from a pho-
tograph and upload it to the interaction
space . During interaction, dialogue often
appears as text, as though emanating from
an avatar like the conversational bubbles
that appear in comic strips
. Advocates of
these systems argue that they help orient
players and that they reduce the impersonal
nature of text-based systems
. Much of the
research employing avatars focuses on the
psychoanalytic dimensions of avatar selec-
tion and usage, such as how an avatar both
reflects aspects of the user's personalities as
it also shapes the online persona through
social interaction (Suler,
1999)
.
In some
online multiplayer games, avatars are used
to duel or fight, although users socialize
through text to a large extent alongside the
avatar battles (Peia & Hancock, 2006)
.
Two avatar studies bear immediate
relevance to nonverbal communication
research
. Nowak and Biocca (2003) exam-
ined avatars varying in anthropomorphic
appearance, representing conversational
partners
. The more anthropomorphic
representations depicted 3-D drawings of
heads and faces, whereas less anthropo-
morphic versions featured disembodied,
cartoonish pairs of eyes and lips
. Contrary
to hypotheses, the less anthropomorphic
the avatar, the greater the participants'
responses on various measures of presence
.
The authors concluded that the more realis-
tic but imperfect human resemblances frus-
trated users' expectations, whereas the
more abstract images drew greater interest
(see also Bengtsson, Burgoon, Cederberg,
Bonito, & Lundberg,
1999)
.
Krikorian, Lee, and Chock (2000)
examined
proxemic
responses
using
avatars
. Within
a
Palace
chat space, partic-
ipants engaged in a get-to-know-you con-
versation online, exchanging text and
manipulating the positions of their respec-
tive avatars
. Researchers captured the
video images and developed an automated
system for measuring the dynamic distance
between avatars based on the pixels in the
center of the avatars and the relative dis-
tances between them
. Results showed rela-
tively even proportions among the pairs of
participants who moved their avatars
closer, farther, or not at all over the course
of the conversation
. Among those who
moved farther apart, there was also an
increase in avatar expressive movement-
as if being too close inhibited other
kinesics-which was accompanied by self-
reports of greater conversational appropri-
ateness and conversational involvement
among participants
. There was also a
curvilinear trend on other ratings, how-
ever
. In general, the correspondence of par-
ticipants' social attraction ratings and
avatar distances mapped onto the predic-
tions of nonverbal expectancy violations
theory (Burgoon & Hale,
1988),
in that
attraction was greater when avatars inter-
acted either at relatively close or far dis-
tances rather than at median ranges
.
Anthropomorphic Icons
.
A less manipula-
ble form of avatars is anthropomorphic
graphics, or icons, accompanying CMC
messages or appearing fixed on a screen
during chat
. Icons have the capacity to
influence receiver's interpretations of mes-
sages, even if receivers are aware that the
icon does not necessarily represent the char-
acteristics of the actual message sender
.
Isotalus (2003) found that receivers'
responses to news stories delivered to
47
2
•
Contexts and Consequences
handheld computers
differed
based on the
apparent gender of an icon accompanying
the story
. Participants paid more attention
when the icon appeared
to be female
.
Furthermore, males found the news
more
credible when accompanied by a male icon,
whereas females' credibility assessments
were higher for female icons
; evaluations of
the stories' entertainment
followed an
opposite pattern
. Lee (2005) also used gen-
dered icons to accompany
spontaneous,
dyadic CMC chat messages, but the partic-
ipants were aware that the gendered
icon
had been randomly assigned to users
; that
is, there was an even chance that the gender
of the icon and the user were mismatched
.
Despite this awareness, participants
(espe-
cially female participants)
attributed the
gender of the chat partner on the basis
of
the icon's gender
. This over-interpretation
of gender based on a simple physical appear-
ance representation suggests,
as previous
perspectives have argued, that CMC plus a
little nonverbal representation
leads to
potentially exaggerated perceptions
.
Videocon ferencing
.
Research exploring
videoconferencing to enhance
social pres-
ence and improve remote
collaborations
predates the Internet and digital technol-
ogy considerably (see for review Chapanis,
Ochsman, Parrish, & Weeks, 1972)
. Most
videoconferencing arrangements
and stud-
ies involve real-time visual conveyance
of
participants' faces to remote partners,
accompanied by their voices
. The results
of
this research have been generally
disap-
pointing
. Whereas users report greater sub-
jective presence when video
is available,
their communication effectiveness and task
output tends to be no better, and sometimes
worse, than non-visual interfaces
provide
(Gale, 1991
; Storck
& Sproull, 1995)
.
Similarly, a recent study comparing asyn-
chronous
videoconferencing with synchro-
nous video, text-only
systems, and FtF
conditions obtained few differences on task
performance quality or interpersonal
per-
ceptions due to main effects of the
inter-
faces (Nowak, Watt, & Walther,
2005)
.
There was greater perceived
involvement
with others group members in those condi-
tions with
fewer
visual cues, which, in turn,
led to increases in social
attraction and
credibility ratings of partners
.
Interestingly, by focusing video
on the
objects
that collaborators discuss rather
than on facial displays (but including
par-
ticipants' voices) seems to be superior to
face-oriented videoconferencing
in many
cases (Brittan, 1992)
. This may be due
to
the communication efficiency with
which
humans process multimodal
messages,
when one level of content traverses
the
vocal-to-auditory channel,
leaving vision
free to focus on a common object
. When
videoconferencing depicts the communica-
tors rather than the objects they
are dis-
cussing, the objects
and the image of
partners compete
for visual attention,
leading to decrements
in efficiency and
performance
.
Fussell and colleagues (Fussell, Kraut,
&
Siegel, 2000
; Gergle, Kraut, & Fussell,
2004
;
Kraut, Fussell,
& Siegel, 2003)
have
employed audio/videoconferencing with
the
visual field aimed at an object that one part-
ner manipulates but both can see
.
In one
study (Kraut et al
.,
2003)
a head-mounted
camera focused on a bicycle that one partner
repaired while an expert helper
elsewhere
viewed the bicycle (and the repairer's manip-
ulations of it) via video, and instructed
the
repairer via audio while both looked at the
bike
. In another study (Gergle et al
.,
2004),
both partners viewed puzzle pieces
on an
electronic video display, while
one partner
guided the other via voice toward the puz-
zle's completion
. Compared with other video
foci, or no video, participants
performed
more accurately and quickly
at the tasks
that were employed in these studies
.
In the
Nonverbal Dynamics in Computer-Mediated Communication
s
4 7
3
scenarios, the face's physical appearances
and expressive dynamics are less useful, and,
instead of distracting users with these irrele-
vant data, their visual attention is directed to
objects providing what Clark and Brennan
(1991) conceptualize as "communicative
grounding
."
As promising as this line of research on
the role of video appears to be, its promise
is limited to those collaborative activities
in which physical objects are the focus of
the conversation
. There are many conversa-
tions, however, where the focus is not on
tangible items but rather on abstract issues
that reside in the thoughts and feelings of
communicators
. A conversational efficiency
framework-that complementary receptors
such as the ears and the eyes are well suited
to multimodal presentations of voice and
visual data-can be extended to the
realm of subjective data
.
Object-oriented
conversation
can be distinguished from
person-oriented conversation, however,
with the latter referring to conversation
about persons' ideas, attitudes, and feelings
.
The most useful and efficient combination
of verbal, vocal, and visual cues in person-
oriented videoconferencing would be, quite
traditionally, verbal content accompanied
by vocalic and facial/kinesic cues supple-
menting the verbiage with affective infor-
mation
. There is little novelty in this
proposition, except that in the present
argument we may advance that these com-
binations are most useful and efficient for
person-oriented conversations, and not for
object-oriented discussions
. In the case of
mediated interaction with video, more
advanced research should explore whether
the focus of video on objects or faces inter-
acts with the orientation of the conversation
in predicting conversational effectiveness
.
Moreover, in many conversations, par-
ticipants switch between object orientation
and person orientation ad hoc and often,
and technological systems need to adapt or
simultaneously facilitate both
. As designers
advance systems that can support these
conversations, it would be useful for
designers to recall who, in FtF interaction,
gets to choose the view
. In contemporary
videoconferencing systems, the message
sender is often the party who chooses where
to point the camera
; the
sender
chooses the
receiver's
field of vision
. In FtF interaction,
however, the receiver chooses what he or
she sees ; the receiver chooses the receiver's
visual field
. Advancing new telecommuni-
cation systems that replace nonverbal cues
in electronic form will do well to attend to,
and build into new systems, these funda-
mentals of opportunistic visual choice
.
•
~
Critique and Consequences
A variety of consequences for further theo-
retical and system development may be
inferred from current research trends, and
as new technologies develop, we may
predict that the need for conceptual and
empirical specificity about nonverbal cues,
their functions, and their re-representations
will become even more consequential
. As
the Internet becomes a permanent fixture in
contemporary life, notions about CMC are
applied to other domain-specific theories
.
Such applications often revert to the
premises of some of the older theories
reviewed above, regardless of the current
state of support for those theories
.
It is not uncommon, for instance, for
researchers to assume that without nonver-
bal cues, communicators cannot accom-
plish certain functions that they do in
full-cue environments, and to apply this
assumption to other communication theo-
ries
. In persuasion, for example, it has been
suggested that the lack of nonverbal cues
in CMC prevents receivers from forming
liking assessments of the online persuader,
474
•
Contexts and Consequences
reducing
the likelihood
of
"peripheral
processing"
and promoting instead atten-
tion to persuasive arguments (Guadagno
& Cialdini, 2005)
. When such claims are
accompanied by supporting data, such find-
ings often obtain in experiments employing
CMC in relatively compressed time periods
.
Such conclusions are untenable from the
perspective of the SIP model, which would
qualify such findings as occurring when
participants lack sufficient
motivation
and/or online experience with one another
to have formed impressions
. Indeed, in
many such studies reflecting the dampening
of affect, influence, or sociability of the
medium, the
incapacity
of CMC to allow
normal performance is often unquestioned,
even though these effects might disappear if
CMC-using subjects had ample time
. More
attention to the corpus of CMC research
may prevent theoretical and empirical mis-
steps as people examine CMC in new func-
tional domains
. In the future, more specific
consideration of nonverbal cues, those
missing and those that are replaceable, will
be critical to the development of more
sophisticated theories and better interfaces
.
One exception to the undifferentiated
approach to nonverbal cues in
CMC
appears in recent studies on interpersonal
deception theory (IDT ; Butler & Burgoon,
1996)
applied to the
CMC context
(Carlson, George, Burgoon, Adkins,
&
White, 2004)
. Most commentary on CMC
and deception suggests that the absence of
nonverbal cues should make deception less
likely to detect, due to an assumed connec-
tion between the availability of kinesic
and vocalic indicators of deception and
receivers' deception detection success (see,
e
.g
.,
Hollingshead, 2000)
. IDT, however,
recognizes the transactional nature
of
deception
. Because
receivers
nonverbally
signal suspicion and incredulity to deceivers
in FtF settings,
deceivers
monitor and learn
to accommodate to these suspiciousness
cues, leading to relatively effective (unde-
tected) deception
. Thus, when CMC masks
receivers'
feedback cues,
deceivers
do not
have these guideposts with which to adjust
their performances
. Their unfolding decep-
tive performance is less tailored to the
receiver's suspicions, and ultimately, the
deception is performed more poorly in
CMC, with more frequent deception detec-
tion in CMC rather than less
. Related
research has varied and measured the cues
available in FtF conditions, whereas CMC
conditions have been varied with regard to
synchrony and interactivity, and both have
been examined with respect to the effects
of receiver suspiciousness and sender moti-
vation to remain undetected (Burgoon,
Stoner, Bonito, & Dunbar, 2003
; George,
Marrett, & Tilley, 2004
; Woodworth,
Hancock, & Goorha, 2005), all of which
tell us about the
functional
aspect of cues
absent in CMC, and the combinations of
factors that alter interpersonal deception
online
.
The importance of precise conceptual
and empirical specifications of nonverbal
cues is also seen in research employing vir-
tual reality (VR) systems to facilitate dis-
tributed interaction
. When any nonverbal
behavior can be detected and represented
virtually (see Biocca & Delaney,
1995),
it is
critical to represent it in meaningful ways in
order to elicit particular responses
. The
development of remote haptic capabilities,
for instance, has dealt with measuring and
conveying subjects' exertion, and resistance
by objects, formulating the
"collision
point" at which an actor's representation
meets and object's, to provide propriocep-
tive feedback (Kim et al
., 2004)
. In repre-
senting people, a study revisiting Argyle
and Dean's (1965) equilibrium theoretic
predictions was conducted using varied
levels of eye contact by virtual projections in
an immersive 3-D environment
. Bailenson,
Blascovich, Beall, and Loomis (2001) had
research
participants
don head-mounted
VR eyewear and interact with a virtual man
who varied his gaze at precise intervals,
including eyes shut, to persistent gaze, to
gaze with head turns, to gaze with pupil
dilation when the subject approached
. As
predicted, there were correlations between
the levels of gaze exhibited by the virtual
man and the distances to him adopted by
human participants
.
This study not only demonstrates the
robustness of equilibrium theory but also
contrasts the icon and avatar studies in find-
ing that more is more (rather than less is
more) by isolating an aspect of nonverbal
behavior rooted in theoretical understanding
.
It illustrates the means to test extant theories
and apply them to new settings, and to
employ methods to create effective interfaces
through careful attention to defined, con-
trolled reintroduction of specific nonverbal
elements through communication technol-
ogy
. It will be imperative for designers of new
electronic communication systems to know
what nonverbal, behavioral cues precisely
affect particular functions, if new systems will
be successful at representing those signals
through alternative symbols such as text,
time, icons, video, or VR representations
.
•
~
References
Nonverbal Dynamics in Computer-Mediated Communication
•
4
7
5
Argyle, M
., & Dean, J
. (1965)
. Eye-contact,
distance and affiliation
.
Sociometry, 28,
289-304
.
Bailenson, J
. N
., Blascovich, J
., Beall, A
. C
., &
Loomis, J
. M
. (2001)
. Equilibrium theory
revisited
: Mutual gaze and personal space
in virtual environments
.
Presence, 10,
583-598
.
Bengtsson, B
., Burgoon, J
. K
., Cederberg, C
.,
Bonito, J
., & Lundberg, M
. (1999)
.
The
impact of anthropomorphic interfaces on
influence, understanding, and credibility
.
Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii
International
Conference on
Systems
Science
. Retrieved July 30, 2005 from
h
ttp ://ieeexplore
.ieee
.org/search/wrappe
r
.jsp?arnumber=772736
Biocca, F
., & Delaney, B
. (1995)
. Immersive
virtual reality technology
. In F
. Biocca &
M
. R
. Levy
(Eds
.),
Communication in the
age of virtual reality
(pp
.
57-124)
.
Hillsdale, NJ
: Erlbaum
.
Brittan, D . (1992)
. Being there
: The promise
of multimedia communications
.
Techno-
logy Review,
95(4), 42-50
.
Butler, D
. B
., & Burgoon, J
. K
. (1996)
.
Interpersonal deception theory
.
Com-
munication Theory,
6, 203-242
.
Burgoon, J
. K ., & Hale, J
. L
. (1988)
. Nonverbal
expectancy violations
: Model elaboration
and application to immediacy behaviors
.
Communication Monographs,
55,
58-79
.
Burgoon, J
. K ., Stoner, G
. M
., Bonito, J
. A
., &
Dunbar, N
. E
. (2003)
.
Trust and deception
in mediated communication
.
Proceedings
of the 36th Annual Hawaii International
Conference on Systems Sciences
. Retrieved
July 30, 2005 from
h
ttp
://ieeexplore
.ieee
.org/search/wrapper
.jsp?arnumber
=
1173792
Carlson, J
. R
., George, J
. F
., Burgoon, J
. K
.,
Adkins, M
., & White, C
. (2004)
. Deception
in computer-mediated communication
.
Group Decision and Negotiation,
13, 5-28
.
Chapanis, A ., Ochsman, R
. B
., Parrish, R
. N
., &
Weeks, G
. D
. (1972)
. Studies in interactive
communication
: I
. The effects of four com-
munication modes on the behavior of teams
during
cooperative
problem-solving
.
Human Factors, 14, 487-509
.
Chidambaram, L
., & Bostrom, R
. P
. (1993)
.
Evolution of group performance over time
:
A repeated measures study of GDSS effects
.
Journal o f Organizational Computing, 3,
443-469
.
Clark, H
. H
., & Brennan, S
. E
. (1991)
.
Grounding in communication
. In L
. B
.
Resnick, R
. M
. Levine, & S
. D
. Teasley
(Eds
.),
Perspectives on socially shared cog-
nition (pp
. 127-149)
. Washington DC
:
American Psychological Association
.
Cramton, C
. D
. (2001)
. The mutual knowledge
problem and its consequences for dispersed
476
•
Contexts and Consequences
collaboration
.
Organization
Science,
12,
346-371
.
Culnan,
M
.
J
.,
&
Markus,
M
.
L
.
(1987)
.
Information technologies
. In F
. M
. Jablin,
L
. L
. Putnam, K
. H
. Roberts, & L
. W
.
Porter
(Eds
.),
Handbook
of
organizational
communication
: An interdisciplinary per-
spective (pp
.
420-443)
. Newbury Park,
CA
: Sage
.
Daft, R
. L
., & Lengel, R
. H
. (1984)
. Information
richness
: A new approach to managerial
behavior and organization design
. In B
. M
.
Staw & L
. L
. Cummings
(Eds
.),
Research
in organizational behavior (pp
.
191-233)
.
Greenwich, CT
: JAI Press
.
Daft, R
. L
., & Lengel, R
. H
. (1986)
. Organiza-
tional information requirements, media
richness, and structural determinants
.
Management Science, 32,
554-571
.
Danchak, M
. M
., Walther, J
. B
., & Swan, K
. P
.
(2001, November)
.
Presence in mediated
instruction
: Bandwidth, behavior, and
expectancy violations
.
Paper presented at
the conference on Asynchronous Learning
Networks, Orlando, FL
.
Danet,
B
.,
Ruedenberg-Wright,
L
.,
&
Rosenbaum-Tamari, Y
. (1997)
. "HMMM
.
.
. WHERE'S THAT SMOKE COMING
FROM?" Writing, play and performance
on Internet Relay Chat
.
Journal
o f
Computer-Mediated Communication, 2
.
Retrieved March 15, 2005, from h
ttp
://jcmc
.indiana
.edu/vol2/issue4/danet
.htm
l
Douglas, K
. M
., & McGarty, C
. (2001)
. Iden-
tifiability and self-presentation
: Computer-
mediated communication and intergroup
interaction
.
British Journal
of
Social Psy-
chology, 40,
399-416
.
Ekman, P
., & Friesen, W
. V
. (1975)
.
Unmasking
the face
: A guide to recognizing emotions
from facial cues
.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ
:
Prentice Hall
.
Feenberg, A
. (1989)
. A user's guide to the prag-
matics of computer mediated communica-
tion
.
Semiotica,
75, 257-278
.
Fussell, S
. R
., Kraut, R
. E
., & Siegel, J
. (2000)
.
Coordination of communication
: Effects
of shared visual context on collaborative
work
. In
Proceedings of CSCW 2000
(pp
. 21-30)
. New York
: ACM Press
.
Retrieved
January
30,
2005,
from
h
ttp
://www
.cs
.cmu
.edu/-sfussell/pubs/Ma
n
us cripts/p21-fussell
.pdf
Gale, S
. (1991)
. Adding audio and video to an
office environment
. In J
. M
. Bowers &
S
. D
. Benford
(Eds
.),
Studies in computer-
supported collaborative work (pp
.
49-62)
.
North-Holland
: Elsevier Science
.
George, J
. F
., Marrett, K
., & Tilley, P . (2004)
.
Deception detection under varying elec-
tronic media and warning conditions
.
Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii
International
Conference
on System
Sciences
.
Retrieved July 30, 2005 from
h
ttp
://ieeexplore
.ieee
.org/iel5/8934/28293
/
01265080
.pdf?tp=&arnumber=1265080
&isnumber=28293
Gergge, D
., Kraut, R
. E
., & Fussell, S
. R
. (2004)
.
Language efficiency and visual technology
:
Minimizing collaborative effort with visual
information
.
Journal
o f
Language and
Social Psychology, 23,
491-517
.
Godin, S
. (1993)
.
The smiley dictionary
.
Berkeley,
CA
: Peachpit Press
.
Guadagno, R
. E
., & Cialdini, R
. B
. (2005)
. Online
persuasion and compliance
: Social influence
on the Internet and beyond
. In Y . Amichai-
Hamburger
(Ed
.),
The social net
: The social
psychology
of
the Internet (pp
.
91-113)
.
New York
: Oxford University Press
.
Hall, E
. T
. (1959)
.
The silent language
.
New
York
: Anchor Books
.
Henderson, S
., & Gilding, M
. (2004)
. "I've
never clicked this much with anyone in my
life"
: Trust and hyperpersonal communica-
tion in online friendships
.
New Media &
Society, 6,
487-506
.
Hesse, B
. W
., Werner, C
. M
., & Altman, I
.
(1988)
. Temporal aspects of computer-
mediated communication
.
Computers in
Human Behavior, 4,
147-165
.
Hiltz, S
. R
., Johnson, K
., & Agle, G
. (1978)
.
Replicating Bales' problem solving experi-
ments on a computerized conference
: A pilot
study
(Research report no
. 8)
. Newark
:
New Jersey Institute of Technology,
Computerized Conferencing and Com-
munications Center
.
Hogg, M
. A
., & Abrams, D
. (1988)
.
Social
identifications
: A social psychology
of
Nonverbal Dynamics in Computer-Mediated Communication
•
4
7 7
intergroup relations and group processes
.
London
: Routledge
.
Hollingshead, A
. B
. (2000)
. Truth and lying in
computer-mediated groups
. In M
. A
. Neale,
E . A
. Mannix, & T
. Griffith
(Eds
.),
Research in managing groups and teams
(Vol
. 3
: Technology and teams, pp
. 157-
173)
. Greenwich, CT
: JAI Press
.
Iacono, C
. S
., & Weisband, S
.
(1997)
.
Developing
trust
in
virtual
teams
.
Proceedings of the 30th Annual Hawaii
International
Conference
on
System
Sciences
. Retrieved July 30, 2005, from
h
ttp
://ieeexplore
.ieee
.org/search/wrappe
r
.jsp?arnumber=665615
Isotalus, P
. (2003, November)
.
Gender and
interface agents in the on-line news
.
Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the
National Communication Association,
Miami Beach, FL
.
Jarvenpaa, S
. L
., Knoll, K
., & Leidner, D
. E
.
(1998)
. Is anybody out there? The implica-
tions of trust in global virtual teams
.
Journal
of
Management Information Systems, 14,
29-64
.
Jones, S . E
., & LeBaron, C
. D
. (2002) . Guest
editors' introduction
.
Journal o
f
Communi-
cation,
52, 499-521
.
Kalman, Y
. M
., & Rafaeli, S
. (2005)
.
Email
chronemics
:
Unobtrusive
profiling
o f
response times
.
Proceedings of the 38th
Annual Hawaii International Conference
on System Sciences
. Retrieved July 30,
2005, from
h
ttp
://ieeexplore
.ieee
.org/search
/
wrapper
. jsp?arnumber =1385456
Kiesler, S
. (1987) . Social aspects of computer
environments
.
Social Science,
72, 23-28
.
Kiesler, S
., Siegel, J
., & McGuire, T
. W
. (1984)
.
Social psychological aspects of computer-
mediated communication
.
American Psy-
chologist,
39,
1123-1134
.
Kim, J ., Kim, H
., Tay, B
. K
., Muniyandi, M
.,
Srinivasan, M
. A
., Jordan, J
., et al
. (2004)
.
Transatlantic touch
: A study of haptic
collaboration over long distance
.
Presence,
13, 328-337
.
Kraut, R
. E
., Fussell, S
. R
., & Siegel, J
. (2003)
.
Visual information as a conversational
resource in collaborative physical tasks
.
Human-Computer Interaction, 18,
13-49
.
Krikorian, D
. H
., Lee, J
., & Chock, T
. M
.
(2000)
. Isn't that spatial? Distance and
communication in a 2D virtual environ-
ment
.
Journal o
f
Computer-Mediated
Communication,
5
. Retrieved March 7,
2006, from
h
ttp
://www
.jcmc
.indiana .edu
l
vol5/issue4/krikorian
.html
Lea, M
. (1991) . Rationalist assumptions in
cross-media comparisons of computer-
mediated communication
.
Behaviour &
Information Technology, 10,
153-172
.
Lea, M
., & Spears, R
. (1992)
. Paralanguage and
social perception in computer-mediated
communication
.
Journal
o f
Organizational
Computing,
2,
321-341
.
Lea, M
., Spears, R
., & de Groot, D
. (2001)
.
Knowing me, knowing you
: Anonymity
effects on social identity processes within
groups
.
Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin,
27, 526-537
.
Lee, E
. (2005)
. Effects of the influence agent's
sex and self-confidence on informational
social influence in computer-mediated com-
munication
: Quantitative versus qualitative
presentation
.
Communication Research,
32,29-S8
.
Liu, Y
. L
., Ginther, D
., & Zelhart, P
. (2002)
.
An exploratory study of the effects of
frequency and duration of messaging on
impression development in computer-
mediated communication
.
Social Science
Computer Review,
20, 73-80
.
Markus, M
. L
. (1994)
. Finding a happy
medium
: Explaining the negative effects of
electronic communication on social life at
work
.
ACM Transactions on Information
Systems,
12,
119-149
.
Nardi, B
., Whittaker, S
., & Bradner, E
. (2000)
.
Interaction and outeraction
: Instant mes-
saging in action
. In
Proceedings o
f
the
2000
ACM Conference on Computer Supported
Cooperative Work (pp
.
79-88)
. New York
:
ACM Press
. Retrieved March 1, 2006, from
h
ttp
://www
.dis
.shef
.ac
.uk/stevewhittaker
/
outeraction_cscw2000
.pdf
Nowak, K
. L
., & Biocca, F
. (2003)
. The effect
of the agency and anthropomorphism on
users' sense of telepresence, copresence, and
social presence in virtual environments
.
Presence,
12, 481-494
.
4
7
8
•
Contexts and Consequences
Nowak, K
., Watt, J
. H
., & Walther, J
. (2005) . The
influence of synchrony and sensory modality
on the person perception process in computer
mediated groups
.
Journal o f Computer-
Mediated Communication,
10(3), article 3
.
Retrieved July 1, 2005, from httpJ/
j
cmc
.
indiana .edu/vollO/issue3/nowak
.htm
l
Orlikowski, W
. J
., & Yates, J
. (2002)
. It's about
time
: Temporal structuring in organiza-
tions
.
Organization Science,
13, 684-700
.
O'Sullivan, P
. B
. (2000)
. What you don't know
won't hurt me
: Impression management
functions of communication channels in
relationships
.
Human
Communication
Research, 26, 403-431
.
Pen, J
., & Hancock, J
. T
. (2006)
. An analysis
of socioemotional and task communication
in online multiplayer videogames
.
Com-
munication Research,
33,
92-109
.
Postmes, T
., & Spears, R
. (2002)
. Contextual
moderators of gender differences and
stereotyping in computer-mediated group
discussions
.
Personality
and
Social
Psychology Bulletin,
28,
1073-1083
.
Postmes, T
., Spears, R
., & Lea, M
. (1998)
.
Breaching or building social boundaries?
SIDE-effects of computer-mediated com-
munication
.
Communication Research,
25,
689-715
.
Postmes, T
., Spears, R
., Lea, M
., & Reicher, S
.
D
. (2000)
.
SIDE issues centre stage : Recent
developments in studies of deindividuation
in groups
.
Amsterdam
: Royal Netherlands
Academy of Arts and Sciences
.
Reid, F
. J
. M
., Ball, L
. J
., Morley, A
. M,, &
Evans, J
. S
. B . T
. (1997)
. Styles of group
discussion in computer-mediated decision
making
.
British Journal of Social Psy-
chology,
36, 241-262
.
Reid, F
. J
. M
., Malinek, V
., Stott, C
., & Evans,
J
. S
. B . T
. (1996)
. The messaging threshold
in computer-mediated communication
.
Ergonomics,
39,1017-1037
.
Rezabek, L
. L
., & Cochenour, J
. J
. (1998)
.
Visual cues in computer-mediated commu-
nication
: Supplementing text with emoti-
cons
.
Journal of Visual Literacy,
18,
210-215
.
Rice, R
. E
. (1984)
. Mediated group communica-
tion . In R
. E
. Rice & Associates
(Eds
.),
The
new media
: Communication, research, and
technology (pp
.
129-156)
. Beverly Hills,
CA
: Sage
.
Rice, R
. E
. (1990)
. Computer-mediated commu-
nication system network data
: Theoretical
concerns and empirical examples
.
Inter-
national Journal of Man-Machine Studies,
32, 627-647
.
Rice, R, E
., & Case, D
. (1983)
. Electronic
message systems in the university
: A
description of use and utility
.
Journal of
Communication,
33,
131-154
.
Rintel, E
. S
., & Pittam, J
. (1997)
. Strangers
in a strange land
: Interaction management
on Internet Relay Chat,
Human Com-
munication Research,
23, 507-534
.
Rogers, P
., & Lea, M
. (2004)
. Cohesion in
online groups
. In K
. Morgan, C
. A
.
Sanchez, C
. A
. Brebbia, & A
. Vioskounsky
(Eds
.),
Human perspectives on the Internet
society
: Culture, psychology and gender
(pp
. 115-124)
. Southampton, England
:
WIT Press
.
Sanderson, D
. (1993)
.
Smileys
.
Sebastopol, CA
:
O'Reilly & Associates
.
Short, J
., Williams, E
., & Christie, B
. (1976)
.
The social psychology of telecommunica-
tions
.
London
: Wiley
.
Siegel, J
., Dubrovsky, V
., Kiesler, S
., & McGuire,
T
. W
. (1986)
. Group processes in computer-
mediated communication
.
Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
37, 157-187
.
Sproull, L
., & Kiesler, S
. (1986) . Reducing social
context cues
: Electronic mail in organiza-
tional
communication
.
Management
Science,
32,
1492-1512
.
Steinfield, C
. W
. (1986)
. Computer-mediated
communication
in
an
organizational
setting
:
Explaining
task-related
and
socioemotional uses
. In M
. L
. McLaughlin
(Ed
.),
Communication yearbook
9 (pp
. 777-
804)
. Beverly Hills, CA
: Sage
.
Storck, J
., & Sproull, L
. (1995)
. Through a
glass darkly : What do people learn in video-
conferences?
Human
Communication
Research,
22,
197-219
.
Suler, J
. (1999)
.
The psychology of avatars and
graphical space in multimedia chat commu-
nities, or, how I learned to stop worrying
Nonverbal Dynamics in Computer-Mediated Communication
•
4
7
9
and
love
my
Palace
props
.
Retrieved
March
6,
2005,
from
h
ttp
://www
.rider
.edu/-suler/psycyber/psyav
.htm
l
Tidwell,
L
.
C
.,
&
Walther,
J
.
B
.
(2002)
.
Computer-mediated communication effects
on disclosure, impressions, and interper-
sonal evaluations
: Getting to know one
another a bit at a time
.
Human
Com-
munication Research, 28,
317-348
.
Walther, J
. B
. (1992)
. Interpersonal effects in
computer-mediated interaction
: A relational
perspective
.
Communication Research, 19,
52-90
.
Walther, J
. B
. (1996)
. Computer-mediated com-
munication
: Impersonal, interpersonal, and
hyperpersonal interaction
.
Communication
Research, 23, 3-43
.
Walther, J
. B
. (1997)
. Group and interpersonal
effects in international computer-mediated
collaboration
.
Human Communication
Research, 23,
342-369
.
Walther, J
. B
. (in press)
. Selective self-presenta-
tion in computer-mediated communication
:
Hyperpersonal dimensions of technology,
language, and cognition
.
Computers in
Human Behavior
.
Walther, J
. B
., & Bunz, U
. (2005)
. The rules of
virtual groups : Trust, liking, and perfor-
mance in computer-mediated commu-
nication
.
Journal o
f
Communication, SS,
828-846
.
Walther, J
. B
., & Burgoon, J
. K
. (1992)
. Relational
communication in computer-mediated inter-
action
.
Human Communication Research,
19,50-88
.
Walther, J
. B
., & D'Addario, K
. P
. (2001)
. The
impacts of emoticons on message interpre-
tation in computer-mediated communica-
tion
.
Social Science Computer Review, 19,
323-345
.
Walther, J
. B
., Loh, T
., & Granka, L
. (2005)
.
Let me count the ways
: The interchange of
verbal and nonverbal cues in computer-
mediated and face-to-face affinity
.
Journal
o f
Language and Social
Psychology, 24,
36-65
.
Walther, J . B
., & Parks, M
. R
. (2002)
. Cues
filtered out, cues filtered in
: Computer-
mediated communication and relationships
.
In M
. L
. Knapp & J
. A
. Daly
(Eds
.),
Handbook
of
interpersonal communication
(3rd ed
., pp
. 529-563)
. Thousand Oaks,
CA
: Sage
.
Walther, J
. B
., Slovacek, C
., & Tidwell, L . C
.
(2001)
. Is a picture worth a thousand
words? Photographic images in long term
and short term virtual teams
.
Communica-
tion Research, 28,
105-134
.
Walther, J
. B
., & Tidwell, L
. C
. (1995)
.
Nonverbal cues in computer-mediated
communication, and the effect of chrone-
mics on relational communication
.
Journal
o f
Organizational Computing,
S, 355-378
.
Witmer, D
., & Katzman, S
. (1997)
. On-line
smiles
: Does gender make a difference in
the use of graphic accents?
Journal
of
Computer-Mediated Communication,
2(4)
.
Retrieved March 16, 2006, from
h
ttp
://
www
.jcmc
.indiana
.edu/vol2/issue4/wi
t
merl
.html
Woodworth, M
. T
., Hancock, J
. T
., & Goorha,
S
. (2005)
.
The motivational enhancement
effect
: Implications for our chosen modes
of
communication in the 21st century
.
Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii
International
Conference
on System
Sciences
. Retrieved July 30, 2005, from
h
ttp
://ieeexplore
.ieee
.org/search/wrappe
r
.jsp?arnumber=1385273
