Sociology of Media - Face to face, Mediated and Quasi Mediated Interaction - Essay Example

Sociology of Media University Name Introduction. Social interaction is the practice or practices of two people or many persons, to act in such a way that their behaviors and responses affect one another’s experiences in a subjective way. In other words, the parties involved in a social interaction are fully aware of each other. However, the awareness involved is not just at a physical level, but can be at a mind level, in the case where the two parties separated by time and space (Rummel, 1976, p.23). Two people communicating via letters email or talking over a telephone line are essentially interacting socially, so are a son and father talking face to face over a meal (Meyrowitz, 1985, p. 120). As such, social interactions are not subject to physical parameters or behaviors but are mutually subjective. This implies that the involved persons must be oriented mutually and thus the element of consensus must exist (Lycke, 2007, p.279). However, due to the complex nature of interpersonal relationships where many acts such as speech, acknowledgement, apology, non verbal cues and others intertwine, the nature of social interactions is quite ambiguous. Face to face, Mediated and Quasi mediated interaction. Face to face social interaction is where all the parties involved in communication are present physically in space as well as in time. The individuals interacting expose themselves to a myriad of both verbal and non verbal cues in that not only can one hear the other person, but one can also see their facial expressions in the form of say frowning, smiling or winking (Meyrowitz, 1985). One can also see the other’s body posture and eye movements and be well placed to interpret accordingly and thus adjust or shift their mode of presentation (Thompson, 1995, p. 84). On the other hand, mediated social interactions refer to a situation where the communicators' physical locations are separate, and they could as well be separate in time (Thompson, 1995, p. 85). Communication takes place through writing letters, emails, phone conversations, mobile phone messaging, television and radio broadcasts etc. Computers, mobile phones and other electronic related media have brought to age a communication revolution (Goby, 2000, p. 86). They have effectively changed the way we relate, who we relate to and why we relate to whoever we relate to by interlinking the world into a global village. Moreover, physical, time, cultural, and language barriers have reduced or absolutely neutralized (Bordia, 1997, p.114). All it takes to communicate to a person a thousand miles away is a computer and internet connection or a phone call. Indeed, one can span international boundaries as well without the limitation of the locality or nationality. It has thus come to pass that mediated forms of interaction have overtaken face-to-face communication or interaction. Indeed, in this modern society, one can go for a whole day without a single face to face interaction but still interact with numerous people via mediated forms. This does not only apply to individuals but also to organizations where the people use a computer and other electronic media communication to develop consensus, share and borrow ideas, coordinate projects, perform surveys, market products etc (Bordia, 1997, p.113). Another aspect worth considering is the mediated quasi – interaction which introduces an aspect of symbolism produced during mediated interaction. These are the non verbal aspects of computer mediated conversation and though appearing as upright absurd, indeed effective nonverbal communication does exist in technological formats (Carter, 2003, p.30). Therefore as human societies metamorphose into a globally advancing community, technology has soared to a prominent position and in so doing has affected all human cultures and interactions. Given that languages and communications are forever changing phenomena, it thus goes without saying that the plethora of new terms, words and other cues developed today are directly or indirectly affected by the influence of technological advancements in communicative interactions (Thompson, 2005, p.32). In shifting from face-to-face to mediated and quasi-mediated forms of interaction, we lose all important aspects and functions of non-verbal cues. This is the major shortcoming in shifting, though the many advantages of mediated forms attempt to cover up for this. Main Differences. Face-to-face interaction simply involves communication structured in a two –way model. The parties involved are present in time and space. The communication happens in the sense that one person presents information or speaks to the other party or parties, and they respond verbally or nonverbally. (Thompson, 1995, p.90).The roles might or might not be reversed, and this can thus be referred to as an unfolding interactive communication. A major differentiating character of face to face mode of interaction is the inevitable and continuous application of multiple nonverbal cues –changes in intonation, changes in body posture, changing facial expressions, gesturing, eye contact and movements etc (Bordia, 1997, p.109). Such cues are of great importance as they help in the interpretation of messages passed on and also in deciphering hidden meaning, as in the case where one says something while the projected body language connotes the absolute opposite. On the other hand, mediated communication does not take into consideration the idea of co-presence of the parties involved. Indeed, mediated communication spans across time and space (Lewandowski, 2011, p.1808). However, it must be noted that mediated interaction can still happen in the same space as well as the time span. This means that one can communicate via a media device to another person sitting on the next chair as in the case of students chatting via electronic messages during class time (Meyrowitz, 1985, 125). It should, however, sound illogical and unethical for a couple to interact using the same means during a date in a hotel but acceptable for them to do so when separated physically. Distinctive temporal aspects and the unique aspects of the applied medium determine the nature of mediated interaction. For instance, a letter writing interaction is different from telephoning interaction so is an emailing experience different from mobile phone messaging (Thompson, 2005, p.34). Each of these media presents a unique set of spatial characteristics that make the interaction different from another when employing a different medium. Another form of mediated interaction is the mediated quasi interaction and refers to the passing of information via instruments such as television, radio, magazines, books, videos, books, etc (Carter, 2003, p.32). There still is the stretching of Interaction across time as well as across space, but the main distinguishing feature of quasi-mediated forms is that they are one way, that is, open ended. This is because the intention of such media is reaching a large audience and also because their structures do not allow for a two way interaction. For instance, the production of a film or magazine aims at anybody with ways and means to acquire it. However, the creator does not expect a response. Though primarily momological in nature, it might nonetheless be argued that indeed the creator of the film receives a response by analyzing how many people bought the film. Whether that is true or not, the interaction is fundamentally monolithic (Bordia, 1997, p.115) as the response, whatever it might be is neither immediate nor guaranteed. Quasi interactions require the formation of symbolic forms to target certain recipients (Thompson, 1995, p.38). There is no reciprocity or any degree of interpersonal responsiveness associated with other modes of interaction that is, mediated and face to face. An increasing number of people this day are relying on mediated forms of communication to further personal relationships, exchange and receive information as well as to perform business tasks. This has resulted in development of a new basis and platforms on which we transmit information (Carter, 2003, p.34). Relationships formed from such mediated interactions have resulted in the creation of unique situations. A good example is the now prevalent social networking sites like face book and twitter where a whole new range of opportunities and phenomena now exist. Traditional face-to-face links constructed in handshakes, hugs etc. are no longer the main prerequisites of forming friendships. Strengths and weaknesses. It is quite true that face-to-face interactions have no substitutes since the non-verbal aspect is unique to this form only. Human beings are wired to extract truths from facial expressions, gestures, body movements, vocal intonations, body movements, scents etc by utilizing innate inborn abilities (Carter, 2003, p.31). These cues improve judgment as well as promote interpersonal understanding. However, in an increasingly virtual society, people are relying much more on artificial cues such as emoticons to decipher certain meanings. Such modifications are resulting in falsifications of true character and wrong deciphering of intended meanings (Carter, 2003, p.33). Weaknesses, however, exist in face-to-face interactions, the main being the limitation in space and time, in that, there is a requirement of co-presence. Mediated forms of interaction have in recent times become very common and have taken a central role in human relations. The use of various media for communication brings forth many forms of mediated interactions that are uniquely distinctive from face-to-face interactions. These new situations can be referred to as 'mediated computer interactions'. This a loose term used because of the central role that computer technology has played in facilitating communication. However, in practice, distinction must be used in describing the various forms of mediated interactions (Thompson, 2005). When using mediated forms, both pros and cons can be indeed, do exist. Similarities between various forms are also found and thus there exists no clear cut distinction between the various forms (Lycke, 2007, p.273). For instance, both emailing and writing letters are two-way and utilize the written word other than spoken words but still differences abide. The time taken to relay the information is different so is the structuring used as well as materials used. Other modes of interaction encountered, for instance in the internet provide a whole new outlook in communication. A good example is the social networking sites like face book and twitter. One can befriend total strangers, view user information, join groups of choice, upload photos and notes and do a myriad of other things not available in other forms of interaction. All that is required are the skills and necessary equipment (Wang, 2011, p.1115). The main disadvantage of mediated forms is the blockade of non verbal cues of communication which play a very important role in human interactions. The human society has gained a sociological angle by facilitating the growth of communicative media that are of significance to the history of interactive development (Vrasidas, 2003). Tracing back to the discovery of the printing press in medieval Europe, it is true that the main, almost exclusive means of exchanging information were by word of mouth and hence face-to-face communication took centre stage (Thompson, 1995, p.106). Limited forms of mediated communication and quasi-mediated indeed existed though they were available to a small clique of the society then. However, in the ensuing centuries, the printing technology spread fast followed closely by the evolution of the electronic age in the last two centuries. Social existence remained forever changed, although face-to-face communication still has its unique place in society. Though heavily supplemented, face-to-face mediated communication cannot be dislodged, so to speak (Wang, 2011, p.1111). It must be appreciated that non verbal signals available during interpersonal communication have a great impact and in many cases outweigh verbal material. Various works by leading psychologists such as Sigmund Freud and Dr. Paul Ekman did suggest that non verbal aspects of communication account for more than seventy percent of communication (Carter, 2003, p.33). This is the very thing that mediated and quasi mediated forms lack. It thus seems illogical that one can rely solely on typewritten words, some from total strangers, to decipher correct meanings and even establish genuine relationships as in the seemingly ridiculous online dating. The point is mediated forms lack that spontaneity of emotional affinity and instinct associated with interpersonal face-to-face relations (Ball, 1968). With all the negativity, or rather, short comings associated with mediated forms of interaction, human evolution and the times, we find ourselves in demand for an embrace of these forms. Indeed our civilization as we know it today would shrink and crumble if we were somehow to do away with all forms of mediated communication (Thompson, 2005). With advanced technological communications modes, we are set free from the spatial properties and temporal aspects of the now. We do not have to be bound by space, culture, time or other aspects required for face-to-face communication. Indeed, communicative media like the internet, television and radio have allowed us to travel across time and witness actions and events unavailable in our locale. We can even travel back in time and witness almost first-hand happenings of the past (Bordia, 1997, p.112). This is the marvel of communicative media, which we can refer to as communicative teleportation of our age. Information is relayed to millions of people from a single source while sensitive information can be relayed to target recipients through secure lines. This is transformation of humanity and its interactions (Horton, 1956, p.221). A perfect example of how mediated forms of communication have impacted human societies is by taking a peek in the field of politics. Prior the discovery of the printing press, political leaders’ visibility depended largely on a physical appearance before the people, that is, co-presence. This meant that a leader could only meet the select few in the circles of power and the lucky citizens who happened to be physically present during a leader’s visit (cited in Geertz, 1983). Today, a leader can virtually address and 'meet' thousands of supporters through the mediated media. Conclusion. Face to face interactions call for co-presence in both time and space and adversely limit the people involved in terms of e.g. the number of people impacted by the information shared. However, this mode of interaction is rich in symbolic non-verbal cues which, through intensive research, have been proven to impact the nature of human communication positively. Mediated forms of interaction, on the other hand, offer an escape from the bondage of space and or time. Co-presence is irrelevant when this mode comes to play, and this is the catch. The sphere of communication is expanded, and new aspects of communication are created. It is these advantages that have made this form of communication increasingly dominant in modern day social human interactions (Goffman, 1981). Finally, mediated-quasi interaction represents forms symbolically produced for the benefit of a range of recipients and examples include television broadcasts, radio, films, magazines etc. Clearly, therefore, the shift to the mediated and quasi-mediated forms of interaction has impacted the human society positively by removing the limitations of space and time encountered in face-to-face communication. Interaction has proceeded between strangers and human aspects like commerce, politics, friendships etc. have shifted to greater heights. References. Bordia, P., 1997. Face-to-Face Versus Computer – Mediated Communication: A Synthesis of the Experimental Literature. The Journal of Business Communication, 34(1), p. 99-118. Carter, K.A, 2003. 'TYPE ME HOW YOU FEEL: Quasi-Nonverbal Cues in Computer-Mediated Communication', ETC: A Review Of General Semantics, 60, (1), p. 29, Literary Reference Center Plus, EBSCOhost, viewed 22 May 2012. Lewandowski, J., Rosenberg, B., Jordan Parks, M., & Siegel, J. 2011. 'The effect of informal social support: Face-to-face versus computer-mediated communication', Computers In Human Behavior, 27 (5) pp. 1806-1814, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 23 May 2012. Rummel, R, J., 1976. Understanding Conflict and War: Vol.2. Berverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Strøms, H., Grøttum, P., & Lycke, K. 2007. 'Content and processes in problem-based learning: a comparison of computer-mediated and face-to-face communication', Journal Of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 3, pp. 271-282, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 25 May 2012. Thompson, J. B., 2005. The New Visibility. Theory, Culture & Society, 22(6), p. 31-51. XIAO-YUN, X., YAN, Z., & ZHONG-MING, W. 2009. 'EFFECT OF THE AMOUNT OF TASK-RELEVANT INFORMATION ON SHARED MENTAL MODELS IN COMPUTER-MEDIATED AND FACE-TO-FACE TEAMS: IS MORE ALWAYS BETTER?’. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 37, (9) pp. 1153-1160, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 24 May 2012. Ball, D. W., (1968). 'Towards a Sociology of Telephones and Telephoners'. In M. T. (ed.), Sociology and Everyday Life. Englewood, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Goby, V. ,P. (2000). Social Interaction and the Internet in Asia. Australian Journal of Communication, 27(3), 79-90. Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of Talk. Oxford: Blackwell. Horton, D. a. (1956). Mass Communication and Para-Social Interaction'. Psychiatry, 19(3), 215- 229. Meyrowitz, J. (1985). 'The Seperation of Social Place from Physical Place'. In No Sense of Place: The Impact of Electronic Media on Social Behaviour (pp. 115-125). New York: Oxford. Thompson, J. (1995). 'The Rise in Mediated Interaction', from The Media and Modernity: A social theory of the media. Cambridge: Polity: 81-118. E. Vrasidas, C. Z. (2003). The Nature of Technology Mediated Interaction in Globalized Distance Education. International Journal of Training and Development, 7(4), 271-286 Read More