Who gets the final words? I came across this interesting title and decided that I should read the whole article – the analysis of young adults' recall of a major conflict with their parents. The study included 208 undergraduate participants, who were asked to recall and detail a major conflict they had experienced with their parents. The reported conflict episodes were coded as follows:
1. Topical content of a conflict
2. Conflict strategy used by parents
3. Conflict strategy used by the young adults
4. Outcome of the conflict
5. Reported consequences of the conflict to them or to their relationship
During data gathering there were identified four general categories for topical conflicts: life and educational decision, social and socializing behavior, moral or appropriate code of conduct and parent’s behavior.
There were three strategies used in dealing with conflict for parents and for young adults: avoidance – being passive and yielding, distribution – demanding and making threats, integration – listening and problem solving.
The authors of the study also coded the conflict outcome (if the conflict was solved or not): outcome preferred by parents, outcome preferred by young adults, compromise and integration. Plus the consequence of the conflict: was it positive, neutral or negative.
And here are the results
Major conflicts reported by our participants were classified in twelve categories as follows: the life decision category was the major conflict theme (14%), follows education (12%), car driving (11.4%), curefew (11%), dating (10.4%), money (8%), social conduct (6.5%), substance and alcohol usage (5%), friendship (3%), parent’s decision (2%), job (1%).
Then the authors found out that the parents were reported to use the distributive strategy most frequently, followed by integrative, avoidance was the less used strategy. Interestingly for young adults the most used strategy was the avoidance, followed by integrative and the less used was the distributive strategy.
For the conflict outcome, interestingly, young adults reported that they do perceive that parents are more likely to get their way in general. One quarter of participants reported also that the conflict was unresolved. From those who reported the conflict was solved, about a half of young adults reported that the outcome was the one preferred by parents, one third reported that the parents and young adults worked it out, only one fifth reported that they got the final words.
What about the consequences of a conflict? Nearly half reported that the conflict actually had some sort of positive consequences, 11% reported neutral consequences.
I kind of expected such an outcome of the analysis, maybe the only thing really surprising for me, was the fact that parents the most used the distributive strategy. The conflict reasons, outcome and positive consequences were pretty expected.
Shearman, Sachiyo and Rebecca Dumlao. 2007. Who Gets the Final Words?: An Analysis of Young Adults' Recall of a Major Conflict With Their Parents. Communication & Mass Media Complete (EBSCO). Conference Paper.
ponedeljek, 31. maj 2010
nedelja, 30. maj 2010
Role-playing activities and learning environments
When dealing with Second Life as a learning environment, this was mine and my partner's theme for 2nd research paper; I came across a study that compared student performances in role playing activities in face to face environment and Second Life. I found this very interesting, because I have never heard before that that role-playing could be and it is, a successful learning activity.
Study: “Comparing Student Interaction in Second Life and Face-to-Face Role-playing Activities”, from authors Fei Gao, Jeong Min Noh and Matthew J. Koehler, all from Michigan State University.
Authors define the role-playing as a “learning activity in which students assume the role of another person and improvise behaviors or consider a problem in a particular, pre-defined situation. Students are usually asked in role-playing to make a decision, resolve conflict or act out the conclusion to an unfinished story.” Several studies in text-based online role-playing activities suggest that this kind of activity may be an effective method for developing understanding and exploring complex concepts and ideas (Bell, Freman & Capper in Gao et al. 2009)
They mention Dickey who explored the role-playing in a three dimensional environment Active Worlds. He found that role-playing activities offer opportunities for experiential learning and situated learning within a collaboration learning environment. (Dickey in Gao et al. 2009)
The purpose of their study was to examine how students interact differently or similarly in a three dimensional online environment – Second Life and in a face to face environment.
Results:
The study showed no difference in the amount of communication between the role-playing activities in the two mentioned environments. In Second Life role-playing activities students tended to take more turns and have shorter exchanges in each turn. The students also generated more concept-related, though they may not be as elaborated as those in face-to-face environment. This comparison has following implications; role-playing activities work in both environments, second, for online educators who are interested in using role-playing activities the study bring good news – because of no difference between SL and FTF. Trhird, there are affordances of each environment – SL lends itself to a different conversational style, which is shorter exchanges but more turn-taking. On the other hand, FTF environment may not allow form more elaboration.
Gao, Fei, Jeong Min Noh and Natthew J. Koehler. 2009. Comparing Role-Playing Activities in Second Life and Face-to-Face Environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research v20 n4 p423-443.
Study: “Comparing Student Interaction in Second Life and Face-to-Face Role-playing Activities”, from authors Fei Gao, Jeong Min Noh and Matthew J. Koehler, all from Michigan State University.
Authors define the role-playing as a “learning activity in which students assume the role of another person and improvise behaviors or consider a problem in a particular, pre-defined situation. Students are usually asked in role-playing to make a decision, resolve conflict or act out the conclusion to an unfinished story.” Several studies in text-based online role-playing activities suggest that this kind of activity may be an effective method for developing understanding and exploring complex concepts and ideas (Bell, Freman & Capper in Gao et al. 2009)
They mention Dickey who explored the role-playing in a three dimensional environment Active Worlds. He found that role-playing activities offer opportunities for experiential learning and situated learning within a collaboration learning environment. (Dickey in Gao et al. 2009)
The purpose of their study was to examine how students interact differently or similarly in a three dimensional online environment – Second Life and in a face to face environment.
Results:
The study showed no difference in the amount of communication between the role-playing activities in the two mentioned environments. In Second Life role-playing activities students tended to take more turns and have shorter exchanges in each turn. The students also generated more concept-related, though they may not be as elaborated as those in face-to-face environment. This comparison has following implications; role-playing activities work in both environments, second, for online educators who are interested in using role-playing activities the study bring good news – because of no difference between SL and FTF. Trhird, there are affordances of each environment – SL lends itself to a different conversational style, which is shorter exchanges but more turn-taking. On the other hand, FTF environment may not allow form more elaboration.
Gao, Fei, Jeong Min Noh and Natthew J. Koehler. 2009. Comparing Role-Playing Activities in Second Life and Face-to-Face Environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research v20 n4 p423-443.
nedelja, 9. maj 2010
Dealing with conflicts in premarital relationships
My last blog post was all about relationships in this modern liquid and emotionally unstable world, but this time I want to say something about conflicts in intimate relationships; the perceptions of conflicts and their endings of males and females. Some time ago I came across a research that dealt with above mentioned subject – Sally A. Lloyd’s article “Conflict in Premarital Relationships: Differential Perceptions of Males and Females”. In her research she included 50 premarital partners (25 couples) which completed behavioral self-report assessments of the number and characteristics of conflicts over a 14-day period. Each couple completed a relationship questionnaire and was trained how to keep disagreement records. The questionnaire contained scales that measured relationship quality (love, satisfaction and commitment) and communication quality (hostility of partner’s communication, self-disclosure anxiety and use of negotiation versus manipulation).
The results of this research are presented in three categories; the conflict and relationship quality, conflict and communication quality and conflict endings.
“Males reported the negative relation of relationship quality to the stability of issues brought up by their partners, on the other side females’ reports that relationship qualities are positively related to the resolution of such conflicts. For females the lower the level of resolution of self initiated conflict, the greater the perceived stability of the conflict issue, but if a conflict is perceived to be unresolved, it may be brought up again. On the other hand males do not connect how often the issue has been brought up by the partner with the resolution of the issue.”
“At this point the author mentions the cycle – becomes one of the female partner initiating a conflict repeatedly in order to get the underlying issue resolved (and to increase her relationship quality), while at the same time the male partner’s perception that she has initiated a conflict on an issue that has come up over and over serves to decrease his perceived relationship quality. This proves, Lloyd claims that males appear to be conflict-avoidant and females to be conflict-confrontive. But how this cycle of conflict can be interrupted? The negotiation use is related in important ways to conflict processes. Both males and females who reported using negotiation reported fewer conflicts, in addition males’ perceived conflicts to be less stable and females to be more resolved. Here we have to mention that hostility also evidenced important relationships to conflict. Hostility and conflict intensity may form a reciprocal relationship – the greater hostility the conflict seems to be more intensive. Here we have to add that for men higher self-disclosure anxiety is associated with greater perceived resolution of conflicts, for females is vice versa.”
At the end I have to say, that even if this research is dated 1987 I think that there are several similarities in how males and females were dealing and perceiving relationship conflicts then, and how they do it now.
The results of this research are presented in three categories; the conflict and relationship quality, conflict and communication quality and conflict endings.
“Males reported the negative relation of relationship quality to the stability of issues brought up by their partners, on the other side females’ reports that relationship qualities are positively related to the resolution of such conflicts. For females the lower the level of resolution of self initiated conflict, the greater the perceived stability of the conflict issue, but if a conflict is perceived to be unresolved, it may be brought up again. On the other hand males do not connect how often the issue has been brought up by the partner with the resolution of the issue.”
“At this point the author mentions the cycle – becomes one of the female partner initiating a conflict repeatedly in order to get the underlying issue resolved (and to increase her relationship quality), while at the same time the male partner’s perception that she has initiated a conflict on an issue that has come up over and over serves to decrease his perceived relationship quality. This proves, Lloyd claims that males appear to be conflict-avoidant and females to be conflict-confrontive. But how this cycle of conflict can be interrupted? The negotiation use is related in important ways to conflict processes. Both males and females who reported using negotiation reported fewer conflicts, in addition males’ perceived conflicts to be less stable and females to be more resolved. Here we have to mention that hostility also evidenced important relationships to conflict. Hostility and conflict intensity may form a reciprocal relationship – the greater hostility the conflict seems to be more intensive. Here we have to add that for men higher self-disclosure anxiety is associated with greater perceived resolution of conflicts, for females is vice versa.”
At the end I have to say, that even if this research is dated 1987 I think that there are several similarities in how males and females were dealing and perceiving relationship conflicts then, and how they do it now.
Lloyd A., Sally. 1987. Conflict in Premarital Relationships: Differential Perceptions of Males and Females. Family Relations, vol. 36, no. 3, 290-294. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/583542 (19th November 2009).
torek, 4. maj 2010
"You can always press delete"
We live in a world where relationships are different, in a world where “till death do us apart” type of romantic relationship is being replaced by more shallow, fast and replaceable type of relationship between men and women. Some time ago I read Zygmunt Bauman book Liquid Love where he explained that once known stable old-fashioned romantic relationships are through and that younger generation are looking for relationships that are stable and durable as long as they give both partners their benefit; as soon as the benefit is over for at least one side, the relationship has no future.
“In our world of rampant individualization relationships are mixed blessings. They vacillate between dream and nightmare, and there is no telling when one turns in the other,” Bauman explains. He goes further and writes that one expert counselor said that when committing yourself, however halfheartedly, remember that you are likely to be closing the door to other romantic possibilities which may be more satisfying and fulfilling. As he continues the promises of commitment are meaningless in the long term ... Like other investments they way and wane. So if you wish to relate, keep your distance; if you want fulfillment from your togetherness, do not make or demand commitments. Keep all your doors open at any time.
In addition he asks himself are the resident of the modern liquid world really after relationships that hold, as they say they are, or do they, more than anything else, desire those relationships to be light and loose and could be thrown aside at any moment.
He also highlights the fact that people are rather than talking about “relating” and “relationships” speak ever more often of connections, of “connecting” and “being connected”. Instead talking about partners they prefer to speak about “networks”. Connections are virtual relations, he explains and unlike old-fashioned relationships, they seem to be made to the measure of a liquid modern life setting where “romantic possibilities” are supposed and hoped to come and go with ever greater speed and in never thinning crowds, “stampeding each other off the stage and out-shouting each other with promises to be more satisfying and fulfilling”. Virtual relationships are, unlike real ones, easy to enter and exit, plus they look clean and smart, feel easy to use and user-friendly, when compared with the heavy, slow-moving, inert messy “real stuff”.
These are only few inserts of a really complex book of modern liquid world and modern liquid love relationships that I wanted to share with you – I think relationships are frequent talk theme nowadays and interesting for man and women.
I want to conclude with Ralph Waldo Emerson’s claim: “When skating on a thin ice your salvation is in speed. When quality lets you down, you tend to seek redemption in quantity.” I just want to add here that not everything is that pessimistic. As Metka Kuhar, PhD, once wrote, it is true that relationships are likely to end sooner nowadays (because every partner in that relationships is aware of its rights and needs), but those same relationships are more fulfilling, quality and intensive.
“In our world of rampant individualization relationships are mixed blessings. They vacillate between dream and nightmare, and there is no telling when one turns in the other,” Bauman explains. He goes further and writes that one expert counselor said that when committing yourself, however halfheartedly, remember that you are likely to be closing the door to other romantic possibilities which may be more satisfying and fulfilling. As he continues the promises of commitment are meaningless in the long term ... Like other investments they way and wane. So if you wish to relate, keep your distance; if you want fulfillment from your togetherness, do not make or demand commitments. Keep all your doors open at any time.
In addition he asks himself are the resident of the modern liquid world really after relationships that hold, as they say they are, or do they, more than anything else, desire those relationships to be light and loose and could be thrown aside at any moment.
He also highlights the fact that people are rather than talking about “relating” and “relationships” speak ever more often of connections, of “connecting” and “being connected”. Instead talking about partners they prefer to speak about “networks”. Connections are virtual relations, he explains and unlike old-fashioned relationships, they seem to be made to the measure of a liquid modern life setting where “romantic possibilities” are supposed and hoped to come and go with ever greater speed and in never thinning crowds, “stampeding each other off the stage and out-shouting each other with promises to be more satisfying and fulfilling”. Virtual relationships are, unlike real ones, easy to enter and exit, plus they look clean and smart, feel easy to use and user-friendly, when compared with the heavy, slow-moving, inert messy “real stuff”.
These are only few inserts of a really complex book of modern liquid world and modern liquid love relationships that I wanted to share with you – I think relationships are frequent talk theme nowadays and interesting for man and women.
I want to conclude with Ralph Waldo Emerson’s claim: “When skating on a thin ice your salvation is in speed. When quality lets you down, you tend to seek redemption in quantity.” I just want to add here that not everything is that pessimistic. As Metka Kuhar, PhD, once wrote, it is true that relationships are likely to end sooner nowadays (because every partner in that relationships is aware of its rights and needs), but those same relationships are more fulfilling, quality and intensive.
sreda, 21. april 2010
Journalism and principles of good work
I have to agree with Dean Wright, Reuters Global Editor for Ethics, Innovation and News Standards when he says that the journalist should do their jobs in a way that earns the thrust of our customers and audience. The trust of the audience and the public is essential in the field of journalism, the thrust in journalists, their stories and sources they have. But how do the journalists gain that thrust, what principle should they follow?
They should follow the principles of a good, critical journalism, but mostly they should follow the ethical standards. If I use the Wright’s words, those principles of good journalist work should be honesty, fairness, transparency, freedom from bias, pursuit of a truth, and an aggressive embrace of innovative ways of storytelling and delivery of information.
Here I want you to present the Code of Ethics of Slovene Journalists, which was adopted by the Slovene Association of Journalist in October 2002. There are several points that needed to be mentioned but I will highlight those that I find the most important – the whole Code of Ethics is available here.
“The journalist should respect the individual's right to privacy and avoid sensationalistic and unjustified disclosure to the public of anyone's privacy. Intrusion into an individual's privacy is only permissible if there is an overriding public interest. With public officials and others seeking power, influence and attention the public's right to be informed is greater.”
“Reporting on judicial matters, the journalist should take into consideration that no one is guilty until legally found so.”
“The journalist should be tactful when gathering and reporting information, publishing photographs and transmitting statements on children and minors, those affected by misfortune or family tragedy, the physically or mentally disabled and others having severe handicaps or illnesses.”
“The journalist should avoid stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance and social status.”
“The journalist should verify the accuracy of information gathered and exercise care to avoid mistakes.”
“When publishing information involving serious allegations, the journalist should try to receive a response from those affected.”
“The journalist should identify the source whenever feasible. The public is entitled to know the source if it is to appraise the significance and credibility of information. The journalist may consent to the anonymity of the source if information cannot be otherwise acquired.”
“The journalist should avoid paying for information and be wary of sources expecting money or any special privilege in exchange for information.”
“The journalist should not conceal essential information he/she has gathered or falsify documents.”
“Plagiarism is not permissible.”
These are only some of the principles of journalistic work that should be taken into consideration, but I think that mostly, fairness, accurateness, honesty, reliability, authority and responsibility should be taken into account. Journalist should not forget that they are working for people, for public interest and not for owners, editors or politician interest and goals. He has to distinguish between the information, advertise and promotion material and also commentary. He has to gather information but should in the same time be free from bias, has to have the ability to report both side of the story (2 or more) and to find reliable sources or documents. Journalistic work is not easy, but if you follow some basic principles you will be successful.
Here you can watch the short video of Dean Wright talking about online journalism ethics.
They should follow the principles of a good, critical journalism, but mostly they should follow the ethical standards. If I use the Wright’s words, those principles of good journalist work should be honesty, fairness, transparency, freedom from bias, pursuit of a truth, and an aggressive embrace of innovative ways of storytelling and delivery of information.
Here I want you to present the Code of Ethics of Slovene Journalists, which was adopted by the Slovene Association of Journalist in October 2002. There are several points that needed to be mentioned but I will highlight those that I find the most important – the whole Code of Ethics is available here.
“The journalist should respect the individual's right to privacy and avoid sensationalistic and unjustified disclosure to the public of anyone's privacy. Intrusion into an individual's privacy is only permissible if there is an overriding public interest. With public officials and others seeking power, influence and attention the public's right to be informed is greater.”
“Reporting on judicial matters, the journalist should take into consideration that no one is guilty until legally found so.”
“The journalist should be tactful when gathering and reporting information, publishing photographs and transmitting statements on children and minors, those affected by misfortune or family tragedy, the physically or mentally disabled and others having severe handicaps or illnesses.”
“The journalist should avoid stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance and social status.”
“The journalist should verify the accuracy of information gathered and exercise care to avoid mistakes.”
“When publishing information involving serious allegations, the journalist should try to receive a response from those affected.”
“The journalist should identify the source whenever feasible. The public is entitled to know the source if it is to appraise the significance and credibility of information. The journalist may consent to the anonymity of the source if information cannot be otherwise acquired.”
“The journalist should avoid paying for information and be wary of sources expecting money or any special privilege in exchange for information.”
“The journalist should not conceal essential information he/she has gathered or falsify documents.”
“Plagiarism is not permissible.”
These are only some of the principles of journalistic work that should be taken into consideration, but I think that mostly, fairness, accurateness, honesty, reliability, authority and responsibility should be taken into account. Journalist should not forget that they are working for people, for public interest and not for owners, editors or politician interest and goals. He has to distinguish between the information, advertise and promotion material and also commentary. He has to gather information but should in the same time be free from bias, has to have the ability to report both side of the story (2 or more) and to find reliable sources or documents. Journalistic work is not easy, but if you follow some basic principles you will be successful.
Here you can watch the short video of Dean Wright talking about online journalism ethics.
nedelja, 18. april 2010
The future of online learning - The virtual learning environments
Reading and reviewing several essays and articles concerning the Second Life as a learning environment, me and Marko (my faculty colleague) came across several authors that had really different positions about the use of Second Life in education purposes. I’m convinced that virtual 3-dimensional learning environments are a future of online learning and teaching, so I want to present you the point of view of Alexandra Petrakou from the School of Communication and Design – University of Kalmar, Sweden. She has different point of view that I do, and she explained it in an article – “Interacting through avatars: Virtual worlds as a context for online education”.
There she begins with an explanation that online education is gradually becoming a viable alternative to traditional campus education due to the rapid development of information technology. She confirms that with the fact that the number of students enrolling in the online courses is increasing and many universities are, in fact, trying to develop e-learning systems. (Petrakou 2010, 1020) The most important fact that she highlights is that the learning environment is not only restricted to the virtual campus, but includes a diversity of activities, experiences and interactions that are a part of the virtual world that exist outside the virtual campus area. At this point she cites Lombardi and McCahill who stated that the real world university campus is a much broader social space that reaches outside the classroom and that learning takes place in the common university areas where learners may have less structured, but equally valuable, opportunity to interact with others – interaction in the virtual world can be just as valuable. (Petrakou 2010, 1026)
She is therefore convinced that the key element of collaboration certainly is social interaction, but at the same time we have to be aware that if there is no social interaction there is also no real collaboration. In addition to this, the virtual world increases the probability that social interaction between students occurs, which in turn my foster collaborative learning. (Petrakou 2010, 1026) At this point I have to say, that the asynchronous interaction is also very important - because allows to stay connected in between the sessions and facilitates critical thinking since students have the opportunity to reflect on and revise their work (Barab et al. in Petrakou 2010, 1026).
As Petrakou concluded in her study, using a virtual world as a context of online education has both advantages and its drawbacks. As explained before, the virtual world provides enhanced interactivity because it allows synchronous communication in combination with spatial dimension, plus includes a diversity of activities, experience and interactions (and not only the virtual campus). But nevertheless she is convinced that the virtual world is currently not adequate as a learning environment on its own. There should be constructed an additional information space in order to gather all information regarding the course and to display this information outside the rather distracting, graphically rich and socially dynamic virtual environment. She also highlights the need to support asynchronous interactivity, which during her study course, was not embedded in the virtual world. (Petrakou 2010, 1027)
At this point I want to conclude, that I'm still convinced that the virtual learning environments are one step ahead the classical online collaboratories - they do not give the opportunity to interact with others outside the learning area, and the students or collaborators are not aware of the presence of the other - they can see their names listed but they do not see what if they are active for sure.
Petrakou, Alexandra. 2010. "Computers & Education Interacting through avatars : Virtual worlds as a context for online education." Computers & Education 54(4): 1020-1027. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.10.007.
There she begins with an explanation that online education is gradually becoming a viable alternative to traditional campus education due to the rapid development of information technology. She confirms that with the fact that the number of students enrolling in the online courses is increasing and many universities are, in fact, trying to develop e-learning systems. (Petrakou 2010, 1020) The most important fact that she highlights is that the learning environment is not only restricted to the virtual campus, but includes a diversity of activities, experiences and interactions that are a part of the virtual world that exist outside the virtual campus area. At this point she cites Lombardi and McCahill who stated that the real world university campus is a much broader social space that reaches outside the classroom and that learning takes place in the common university areas where learners may have less structured, but equally valuable, opportunity to interact with others – interaction in the virtual world can be just as valuable. (Petrakou 2010, 1026)
She is therefore convinced that the key element of collaboration certainly is social interaction, but at the same time we have to be aware that if there is no social interaction there is also no real collaboration. In addition to this, the virtual world increases the probability that social interaction between students occurs, which in turn my foster collaborative learning. (Petrakou 2010, 1026) At this point I have to say, that the asynchronous interaction is also very important - because allows to stay connected in between the sessions and facilitates critical thinking since students have the opportunity to reflect on and revise their work (Barab et al. in Petrakou 2010, 1026).
As Petrakou concluded in her study, using a virtual world as a context of online education has both advantages and its drawbacks. As explained before, the virtual world provides enhanced interactivity because it allows synchronous communication in combination with spatial dimension, plus includes a diversity of activities, experience and interactions (and not only the virtual campus). But nevertheless she is convinced that the virtual world is currently not adequate as a learning environment on its own. There should be constructed an additional information space in order to gather all information regarding the course and to display this information outside the rather distracting, graphically rich and socially dynamic virtual environment. She also highlights the need to support asynchronous interactivity, which during her study course, was not embedded in the virtual world. (Petrakou 2010, 1027)
At this point I want to conclude, that I'm still convinced that the virtual learning environments are one step ahead the classical online collaboratories - they do not give the opportunity to interact with others outside the learning area, and the students or collaborators are not aware of the presence of the other - they can see their names listed but they do not see what if they are active for sure.
Petrakou, Alexandra. 2010. "Computers & Education Interacting through avatars : Virtual worlds as a context for online education." Computers & Education 54(4): 1020-1027. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.10.007.
"Friending: experience of Facebook"
A lot it was written about Facebook, but let me add something more. I came across interesting article of two writers – Jane Lewis and Anne West with a title “Friending : London-based undergraduates’ experience of Facebook”. They conducted exploratory, qualitative research to look at the nature of “friending” that takes place and the extent to which students are able to manage their interactions in the public space of social networking site – Facebook.
They found out that FB was felt to be a socially necessary tool and a part of increasingly wide range of communication systems. It was valued for the way it enabled broad, low pressure and low commitment communication with acquaintances. The surprising for me was the fact that much time on FB was spend stalking – in other words browsing the users profiles, and the fact that communicating was regarded as fun and not serious. On the other hand it was expected – I make conclusions from my own experiences – that the communication on FB is seen as a supplement to other forms of communication, especially between close friends and a mean to stay in touch with others.
It was also considered to offer a very informal means of communication and maintained mostly very weak and loose ties. These ties seemed, as writers claimed, to act as a security blanket for some students – it was always a possibility of checking to see that they were not missing something.
Here I have to mention that the research findings showed that users tended to perceive the flattened friendship. If we go further the respondents in the study expressed also some anxiety about privacy. The exchanges could be read by different groups of “friends” and there exist a possibility that these exchanges can be broadcasted to the whole network.
The authors explained also that the architecture of the site worked to encourage a particular form of communication between friends, based in the main on banter and gossip, often gleaned from social browsing. The problematic is also the fact that the site requires both the presentation of the self and a process of “friending”. There is a degree of incompatibility between these two imperatives, they claimed.
I have to say that I have a profile on FB for about 2 years now. I have several friends that are my friend also in real life, and I use FB for staying in touch with them. This way of communication for me is a supplement to other forms of communication – the face to face and communication via mobile phones and emails. I do not use FB for stalking purposes but I’m aware that many users do. Fortunately the new FB gives us more privacy, because you can arrange who can see your profile, posts, wall, photos, profile information and other.
Lewis, Jane and Anne West. 2009. "Friending": London-based undergraduates' experience of Facebook. New Media Society 11, 1209. Available at: http://nms.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/11/7/1209.
They found out that FB was felt to be a socially necessary tool and a part of increasingly wide range of communication systems. It was valued for the way it enabled broad, low pressure and low commitment communication with acquaintances. The surprising for me was the fact that much time on FB was spend stalking – in other words browsing the users profiles, and the fact that communicating was regarded as fun and not serious. On the other hand it was expected – I make conclusions from my own experiences – that the communication on FB is seen as a supplement to other forms of communication, especially between close friends and a mean to stay in touch with others.
It was also considered to offer a very informal means of communication and maintained mostly very weak and loose ties. These ties seemed, as writers claimed, to act as a security blanket for some students – it was always a possibility of checking to see that they were not missing something.
Here I have to mention that the research findings showed that users tended to perceive the flattened friendship. If we go further the respondents in the study expressed also some anxiety about privacy. The exchanges could be read by different groups of “friends” and there exist a possibility that these exchanges can be broadcasted to the whole network.
The authors explained also that the architecture of the site worked to encourage a particular form of communication between friends, based in the main on banter and gossip, often gleaned from social browsing. The problematic is also the fact that the site requires both the presentation of the self and a process of “friending”. There is a degree of incompatibility between these two imperatives, they claimed.
I have to say that I have a profile on FB for about 2 years now. I have several friends that are my friend also in real life, and I use FB for staying in touch with them. This way of communication for me is a supplement to other forms of communication – the face to face and communication via mobile phones and emails. I do not use FB for stalking purposes but I’m aware that many users do. Fortunately the new FB gives us more privacy, because you can arrange who can see your profile, posts, wall, photos, profile information and other.
Lewis, Jane and Anne West. 2009. "Friending": London-based undergraduates' experience of Facebook. New Media Society 11, 1209. Available at: http://nms.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/11/7/1209.
Naročite se na:
Objave (Atom)
