Robert Gaven
-
Upload
robert-gaven -
Category
Documents
-
view
99 -
download
0
Transcript of Robert Gaven
A New Age of Communication: How Different Relationships Influence Text Messaging Behavior
As of 2014, 90% of people in the USA own a cell phone and 81% of their activity is attributed to text messaging.
18-29 = 98%30-49 = 97%
60-54 = 88%
65+ = 74%
Its one of the few appliance that, when it goes missing, it has an immediately impact on your life.
Cell Phones and Messaging Have Taken Over Our Lives
(PEW Research Center, 2014)
So why is text messaging so cool bro?
C.A.P.Control the transmission of information
Arrange “face” to meet presentational goals
Preserve aspects of Personality, and disposition
New # who dis?
It also allows recipients to focus on reciprocating the emotions, or intentions of the sender.
… And avoid social embarasment.
“So what did I do for my study?
IV:Sex
• Male• Female
Relationship Type
• Family • Friend• Romantic interest
2x3 Mixed design
DV:WordsEmotioncs Abbreviations Durations
N = 9361F, 32M Sona (n = 42)21F, 21MOnline (n = 51)40F, 11MAge18-23 (49.5%)24-65+ (50.5%)
Table 1.
Mean Amounts for Words, Emoticons, Abbreviations, and Durations preferred by Males and Females for Interaction Effects.
Males Females _________________ __________________
Relationship Type M (SD) M (SD)
Family Relationship Words 2.81 (.21) 3.28 (.15)* Emoticons 1.43 (.23) 1.55 (.17) Abbreviations 1.88 (.4) 2.71 (.28)* Durations (minutes) 216.5 (66.6) 136.9 (48.2)
Friend Relationship
Words 2.75 (.26) 3.48 (.16)* Emoticons 1.71 (.38) 2.63 (.28)* Abbreviations 2.84 (.4) 2.96 (.26) Durations (minutes) 130.9 (105.5)* 297.1 (76.4)
Romantic Relationship
Words 3.13 (.12) 3.31 (.14) Emoticons 2.41 (.39) 2.45 (.28) Abbreviations 2.5 (.4) 2.16 (.27) Durations (minutes) 157.6 (69.7) 102.2 (50.5)
Females, Family, Friend, Words* F(1,91) = 5.635, p = .02, η2 = .058 Females, Family, Abbreviations* F(1,91) = 7.578, p = .007, η2 = .077 Females, Friend, Emoticon* F(1,91) = 7.78, p = .006, η2 = .079 Male, Friend, Duration* F(1,91) = 5.459, p = .022, η2 = .057
Table 2. Mean Amounts for Words, Emoticons, Abbreviations, and Durations preferred by Males and Females for Main Affects. Words Emoticons Abbreviations Durations
IV M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) Relationship Type
Family 3.1(.13) 1.49(.14)* 2.29(.24) 176.74(41.1) Friend 3.1(.13) 2.17(.23) 2.91(.22)* 214(65.12) Romantic 3.21(.12) 2.43(.24) 2.33(.23) 129.92(41.1)
Sex
Male 2.89(.18) 1.85(.29) 2.41(.33) 168.35(67.1) Female 3.35(.13)* 2.22(.21) 2.61(.24) 178.77(48.58)
Female, Words* F(1,91) = 4.176, p = .044, η2 = .044. Friend, Abbreviations* F(1,91) = 18.864, p < .000, η2 = .172 Family, Emoticons* F(1,91) = 24.713, p < .000, η2 = .214.
Place your screenshot here
iPhone project
Show and explain your web, app or software projects using these gadget templates.
Table 3. Mean Amounts of Words, Emoticons, Abbreviations, and Durations Self-Coded by Males and Females. Words Emoticons Abbreviations Durations
IV M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) Relationship Type
Family 28.5 (5.6) 1.12 (.26) 1.74(.41) 535.24(171.01) Friend 32.6(4.1) 1.41 (.4) 2.2 (.4) 282.34(97.94 Romantic 32.4(4.3) 2.24(.52) 2.7 (.758 80.848(27.3)*
Sex
Male 27.1(4.1) 1.2 (.3) 1.8 (.63) 362.22(91.42 Female 35.22(4.1) 2.03 (.5) 2.63 (.63) 236.73(93.67)
Relationship Type, Durations* F(1,39) = 6.895, p = .012, η2 = .15
Durations (In Hours)
Table 4. Mean Amounts of Words, Emoticons, Abbreviations, and Durations Preferred by Relationship Status. Family Friend Romantic Relationship Status M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) Single/Dating
Words 2.93 (1.9) 2.8(.19) 3.23(.18) Emoticons 1.28 (1.33) 2.18 (2.4) 2.5 (1.2) Abbreviations 1.7(.15) 2.6 (.17) 2.3 (2.01) Durations (minutes) 1.97.85(432.7) 143.55(379.34) 145.3(501.9)
Exclusive
Words 3.3 (.16) 3.5 (.17)* 3.3(.16) Emoticons 1.7 (1.3) 2.4 (2.1) 2.4 (2.42) Abbreviations 2.98 (2.43)* 3.17 (2.3) 2.3 (2.22) Durations (minutes) 139.06 (329.6) 312.6 (716.9) 103.2(290.7)
Abbreviations, Family * F(1,91) = 8.431, p = .005, η2 = .085.
Words, Friends* F(1,91) = 5.712, p = .019, η2 = .059
# of Words
# of Emoticons
Words* F(1,40) = 8.084, p = .007, η2 = .168Emoticons* F(1,40) = 7.889, p = .008, η2 = .165
Future Research
Thanks!
References
Angermuller, A., Maingueneau, D., & Wodak, R. (2014). The discourse studies reader: Main currents in theory and analysis John. Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins Publishing Company.
Derks D., Bos A. E. R., & Grumbkow J. K. (2008). Emoticons and online message interpretation. Social Science Computer Review, 26, 379-388.
Huang A. H., Yen D. C., & Zhang X. (2008). Exploring the potential effects of emoticons. Information Management, 45, 466-473.
Herring, S. C., & Zelenkauskaite, A. (2009). Symbolic capital in a virtual heterosexual market: Abbreviation and insertion in Italian iTV SMS. Written Communication, 26, 5-31. DOI:10.1177/0741088308327911
Kato, Y., & Kato, S. (2015). Reply speed to mobile text messages among Japanese college students: When a quick reply is preferred and a late reply is acceptable. Computers In Human Behavior, 44, 209-219.
Ling, R., (2004). The mobile connection: The cell phone’s impact on society. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Lo, S. K. (2008). The nonverbal communication functions of emoticons in computer-mediated communication. CyberPsychology &
Behavior, 11, 595-597.
Oksman, V., & Turtiainen, J. (2004). Mobile communication as a social stage: Meanings of mobile communication in everyday life among teenagers in Finland. New Media & Society, 6, 319–333. DOI:10.1177/1461444804042518
PEW Research & Internet Life Project (2014). Mobile technology fact sheet: Highlights of the Pew Internet Project’s research related to mobile technology. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/mobile-technology-fact-sheet/
Reid, F., & Reid, D. (2010). The expressive and conversational affordances of mobile messaging. Behavior & Information Technology, 29, 3-22.
Thurlow, C. (2003). Generation txt? The sociolinguistics of young people's text-messaging. Discourse Analysis Online. http://www.shu.ac.uk/daol/articles/open/2002-003/thurlow2002003.html
Wolf, A. (2000). Emotional expression online: Gender differences in emoticon use. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 3, 827-833.