Anonymity, group size and proximity influence participation
and communication in computer-mediated communication (CMC) groups. As I wrote
in my first post earlier today, anonymity provides positive things in CMC. It
helps people feel more comfortable in speaking out. In CMC compared to
face-to-face (F2F) communication, low-status members tend to contribute more
freely and all members tend to contribute uninhibitedly on an equal basis. The
negative side of this is that lack of trust can become an issue because anonymity
can also be a shield that hides the clues present in F2F communication that
help people decide who is trustworthy and who isn’t.
Group size influences participation and
communication in that large CMC groups tend to benefit most from CMC because
more ideas tend to be generated per group member than in smaller groups. CMC
makes it easy to exchange information, so when large groups are involved in
information exchange, there is more group communication than in smaller groups
and more of a sense of group involvement. Large groups also provide more of an
opportunity for diversity, which tends to bring more knowledge, experience and
generate more ideas.
Physical proximity also influences participation
and communication. People who are not in the same location who use CMC have the
advantage of anonymity that I listed above, while people who are using CMC in
the same room are conscious of the personal-social identities of themselves and
each other in the room even if they are only communicating via computer. These
people can experience more social pressure and tend to conform more to group
norms and expectations than if they were not in the same room.
Hi Lee, I enjoyed reading your post on Anonymity, group size and proximity. I agree with you when you say that anonymity provides positive influence on CMC rather than negative things. The act of anonymity definitely helps people who may be more nervous than others to feel a sense of comfortability and content when they are communicating. I believe that this sort of comfort is very hard to feel when you are in a face-to-face communication. Although there are more benefits of anonymity that can come about in CMC, you mention one negative aspect which I never really thought of until you mentioned it. You stated, " The negative side of this is that lack of trust.." I'm glad that you had mentioned this because it made me think twice about how my comfortability would change not knowing who this person really is. Because CMC revolves more around not seeing a person face to face, I can understand completely why you pointed out that flaw. When it comes to group sizes, I think you were very on-point with all the reasonings on why some may be more beneficial than others. Just as I wrote in my post as well, I noticed that the author mentioned the various amounts of information that can be shared within a big group compared to a small group. I also agree with what you said on how large groups provides more opportunities of diversity while small groups don't experience that that much. You made some great points about physical proximity and CMC. The one thing that stood out most in the text was how people have the ability to cover their social identities. At first, it was a bit weird to read that but now I do understand that not all successful communications are always face-to-face.
ReplyDelete