Caleb T. Carr

Social Media: Defining, Developing, and Divining

What is a social medium, and how may one moderate, isolate, and influence communicative processes within? Although scholars assume an inherent understanding of social media based on extant technology, there is no commonly accepted definition of what social media are, both functionally and theoretically, within communication studies. Given this lack of understanding, cogent theorizing regarding the uses and effects of social media has been limited. This work first draws on extant definitions of social media and subcategories (e.g., social network sites) from public relations, information technology, and management scholarship, as well as the popular press, to develop a definition of social media precise enough to embody these technologies yet robust enough to remain applicable in 2035. It then broadly explores emerging developments in the features, uses, and users of social media for which future theories will need to account. Finally, it divines and prioritizes challenges that may not yet be apparent to theorizing communication processes with and in mercurial social media. We address how social media may uniquely isolate and test communicative principles to advance our understanding of human–human and human–computer interaction. In all, this article provides a common framework to ground and facilitate future communication scholarship and beyond.

Interaction of Interpersonal, Peer, and Media Influence Sources Online: A Research Agenda for Technology Convergence

This essay renews consideration of how new communication technologies integrates mass, interpersonal, and other communication dynamics, and proposes research to help understand reciprocal social influence processes and information processing patterns in technologyenhanced exchanges. We review discussions about the division and proposed integrations among mass and interpersonal communication research. We argue that recent technologies fostering the intersection of virtual communities and mass messages through Web 2.0 applications offer particular salience to information from anonymous peers, and that a distinctive aspect of many new technologies is that they simultaneously present multiple types of influence sources—mass, peer, and/or interpersonal—in a manner that redefines or re-orders influence processes. We further develop a framework in which interpersonal motivations which computer-mediated communication make especially potent drive mass media information sampling and information processing. New types of public messaging may also be best investigated by stringent analyses of composers’ interpersonal functional goals. Authors’ notes: Authors are listed alphabetically. Affiliations include Department of Telecommunication, Information Studies & Media, Department of Advertising, Public Relations, & Retailing, and Department of Communication. Convergence of Online Influence Sources, 2 The Interaction of Interpersonal, Peer, and Media Influence Sources Online: A Communication Research Agenda for Technology Convergence Developments in communication technologies are raising new questions and resurrecting old questions about the interplay of interpersonal, mass, and—we wish to argue—peer communication. Questions about the interplay of mass media and interpersonal processes are not altogether new. Twenty years ago a special issue of Human Communication Research featured discussions of the “false dichotomy” between mass and interpersonal communication research. These and other critiques of the fields and foci of mass and interpersonal communication seem to focus on three issues: Some of these essays review the history and nature of the paradigms. Others illustrate how traditional mass communication events and interpersonal processes cycle and sequence with one another and have always done so. Yet others suggested the new communication technologies demand a revised view of mass and interpersonal processes; that new technologies blur the boundaries between interpersonal and mass communication events and/or the roles that communicators take on using new systems. Likewise, arguments have been made that the “convergence” of old and new media demands new and unified perspectives on traditionally segregated processes. Some of the questions and assertions on this subject deserve reconsideration in light of recent technological developments, many of which were unforeseen when previous pronouncements were articulated, that change relationships of mass and interpersonal sources. More specifically, some new communication technologies are changing the manner of reception by which individuals acquire information from institutional, interpersonal, and peer information sources. Technology changes the temporal and contiguous presentations of these sources, and may in fact change the information processing and social influence dynamics among these sources; that is, the sequence with which sources are sampled or the simultaneousness with which they appear may have potent effects on the information processing filters and biases. “Media convergence” is a term that has been used to connote several phenomena that are brought about by advancements in telecommunication technology that may change some aspect of the communication process. Sometimes the term refers to the blending of previously individuated mass media: one can watch movies on one’s computer, for example. We wish to discuss another kind of convergence: the potential for simultaneous communication via computers of both conceptually mass and interpersonal channels. For example, one can examine the NYTimes.com while chatting about its content with a friend via Instant Messenger; one can draw political news from a blogger, and post an individual reaction on that blog as a comment. Moreover, in addition to mass and interpersonal sources, new communication technology has made incredibly salient another information source, virtual communities and other forms of peergenerated information, which is accessible at a previously impossible level. This addition may further affect the balance of sources social influence in several settings. How these information streams influence individuals, of course, is not a magic bullet. We believe that in many cases a deeper understanding of the use and influence of these sources may be derived through a renewed focus on the interpersonal goals that may drive users’ information-seeking and processing. How these new Convergence of Online Influence Sources, 3 juxtapositions of institutional, peer, and interpersonal sources may change information processing patterns and effects of information consumption will have much to do with the interplay of motives that drive particular interactions. Technology has also generated new forms of communication, in social networking sites and other systems, which bridge the structural and functional characteristics of mass/interpersonal/peer communication. Such technologies invite research that will advance understanding of how individuals conceptualize communication, instantiate communication strategies, and interpret new mediated message forms and content. The purposes of the present work are several. First, we revisit approaches to the division and interaction of mass and interpersonal communication processes, to see what questions and assertions have been raised that may continue to guide understanding of these processes as they unfold via new technologies. Second, we will attempt to articulate an expanded perspective on the interplay of institutional, peer, and interpersonal sources through contemporary communication technologies, and to articulate research agendas that can help understanding of the information processing patterns that such convergent forms make likely. Third, we identify new forms and functions of mediated communication that challenge previous classifications, in order to invoke principles that may focus research to help explain these new phenomena. Perspectives on Mass/Interpersonal Divisions and Mergers Traditionally, mass communication processes have been conceptualized as oneway message transmissions from one source to a large, relatively undifferentiated and anonymous audience. Interpersonal communication involves smaller numbers of participants who exchange messages designed for, and directed toward, particular others. Interpersonal communication has been considered a two-way message exchange between two or more individuals in which communication strategies are shaped by the instrumental and relational goals of the individuals involved, and the knowledge about one another’s idiosyncratic preferences (see for review Berger & Chaffee, 1989; Cappella, 1989). Several landmark works involve both mass communication and interpersonal processes to render a comprehensive understanding of particular phenomena. The manner in which most people form and change opinions of politics, style, and other cultural issues is well-known to involve mass media messages and interpersonal discussions(e. g., Katz, 1957; Katz & Lazarsfeld, 1955; Lazarsfeld, Berelson, & Gaudet, 1944). Similarly, the integration of mass and interpersonal processes is necessary in order to understand the diffusion of innovations, a communication process that incorporates both mass and interpersonal communication in its very conceptualization (Reardon & Rogers, 1988). Despite their organic relationship in some processes, a review of their conceptual and disciplinary differences shows that the exploration of mass and interpersonal processes often takes place in isolation of one another. This separation helps make clear how they operate together when they do, as well as to set the stage for consideration of their interactions, mergers, and/or convergences. Several commentators have illuminated the causes and consequences of a disciplinary divide between mass and interpersonal communication research. Wiemann, Hawkins, and Pingree (1988) attributed the division to historical and Convergence of Online Influence Sources, 4 academic/bureaucratic differences. Reardon and Rogers (1988) argued that the division developed as a result of scholar’s efforts to define their distinctive contributions to social science. Interpersonal scholars followed the tradition of psychology and social psychology from the 1920s-1930s. Key sources such as Heider’s (1958) Psychology of Interpersonal Relations and the approaches employed by psychologists, sociologists, and anthropologists such as Argyle, Goffman, and Bateson, respectively, helped solidify the relevance of social scientific research on face-to-face interaction and relationships (Reardon & Rogers, 1988), leading to the subarea of interpersonal communication. Mass media research evolved primarily from sociology and political science (Reardon & Rogers, 1988). Mass media research examined how mediated messages affect large audiences. These alternative sub-areas allowed scholars to focus, define, and justify their academic endeavors. Despite its historical utility, this division has been lamented for a variety of reasons. The most prevalent concern is a lack of synthesis between mass and interpersonal communication in terms of the theories and research methods that have developed under alternative foci, to the extent that scholars with functionally similar interests may not be aware of the scientific work being performed outside of their area of specialization (Berger & Chaffee, 1988; Pingree et al., 1988, Reard

Speech Acts Within Facebook Status Messages

This research examines the use of speech acts in computer-mediated communication, specifically in the status messages of the social network site Facebook, to communicate in both a mass and an interpersonal medium. A total of 204 status messages created by 46 participants were captured 3 times daily over 14 consecutive days. Content analysis of these data revealed that status messages were most frequently constructed with expressive speech acts, followed by assertives. Additionally, humor was integrated into almost 20% of these status messages. These findings demonstrate differences in how users express themselves in alternate media. Findings address implications for self-presentation in social networks and theoretical implications for computer-mediated communication research.

One Click, Many Meanings: Interpreting Paralinguistic Digital Affordances in Social Media

In this study we conceptualize cues in social media that require a single click (e.g., Likes, Favorites) as paralinguistic digital affordances (PDAs). Why do people use PDAs and how do they interpret them when they are the recipient? Through focus groups (N = 25) and interviews (N = 26) we address these research questions within a uses and gratifications framework. Using adaptive structuration theory as a lens for analysis, we examine both faithful and ironic uses of PDAs, finding they contribute more than phatic communication and may indicate just as much about the relationship between sender and receiver as they do content.

Increasing Attributional Certainty via Social Media: Learning About Others One Bit at a Time

This study presents a novel examination of changes in attributions about individuals via information obtained from online sources within the context of hiring decisions. An experiment had 127 participants examine dossiers collected about a job applicant, in some conditions containing either positively or negatively valenced information about the applicant, obtained from the Internet. Results indicated online information significantly increases attributional certainty and positively valenced online information led to more favorable impressions of the applicants perceived fit and employability. Surprisingly, results also violate assumptions of the increased magnitude of attributions due to negative information. Findings are discussed with respect to uncertainty reduction strategies, the negativity effect of online information, and implications for job seekers and employers.

ź as social support

Many social media facilitate paralinguistic digital affordances (PDAs): one-click tools for phatic communication to which senders and receivers alike ascribe meaning. This research explores the nature of social support perceived from the receipt of PDAs within social media, seeking to understand how individuals ascribe supportive meaning to PDAs based on (1) their goal in the post to which the PDA was used as a reply, (2) relational closeness with the PDA provider, and (3) the perceived automaticity of the PDA received. A national survey (N 1⁄4 325) explored the receipt of PDAs across five social media, and facilitated cross-platform analysis. Analyses reveal both main and interaction effects among the three proposed antecedents, so that intentional PDAs from relationally close providers to messages seeking social support were perceived as most supportive. Findings reveal individuals heuristically make idiosyncratic sense of the same cue from different senders in different situations.

Masspersonal communication: A model bridging the mass-interpersonal divide

Theoretical discussions about the false dichotomy between interpersonal and mass communication scholarship continue while the emergence of powerful and flexible digital communication tools have made the old distinctions more permeable than ever. Individuals are using communication technologies in ways that expand the intersection of interpersonal communication and mass communication, calling for new frameworks. We introduce masspersonal communication as a concept at the intersections of mass and interpersonal communication, with examples from older and newer communication technologies and practices. The masspersonal communication model is introduced incorporating two dimensions—perceived message accessibility and message personalization—that link mass communication and interpersonal communication and redefine each independent of channel.

Strength of Social Cues in Online Impression Formation Expanding SIDE Research

The social identity model of deindividuation effects (SIDE) predicts individuals in depersonalized settings associate with those with whom they share a salient social identity and disassociate from others. We challenge the strict ingroup/outgroup bifurcation used in prior research and posit that ingroup perceptions differ across distinct (i.e., moderate and extreme) outgroups. A 2 (high cues vs. low cues) × 3 (ingroup, moderate outgroup, extreme outgroup affiliation) experiment utilized 128 subjects to examine how members of an ingroup view individuals belonging to various outgroups. Findings expand SIDE research by addressing the interaction between the valence of social cues to a social group and the strength of those cues. The interaction demonstrates that ingroup members with stronger social cues are more socially identifiable than ingroup members who provided few cues to their ingroup membership, while extreme outgroup members who minimize cues to their identity are more socially identifiable to ingroup members than outgroup members who provide numerous cues.

The Effect of Disclosure of Third-Party Influence on an Opinion Leader's Credibility and Electronic Word of Mouth in Two-Step Flow

Utilizing the two-step flow model, the study sought to understand the effects of perceived third-party influence in social media. Blogger relations is a common strategy in public relations, and frequently results in compensation for coverage. Disclosure of these relationships can vary in explicitness, though the impact of disclosure is unknown. A national sample (N = 405) participated in an experiment in which a blog product review varied in its acknowledged third-party influence. Results indicate explicitness of disclosure of links between message sponsor and opinion leader significantly influences the perceived credibility of the opinion leader, and in turn participants’ attitudes regarding the product being reviewed and purchase intentions.

How Affective Is a “Like”?: The Effect of Paralinguistic Digital Affordances on Perceived Social Support

A national survey asked 323 U.S. adults about paralinguistic digital affordances (PDAs) and how these forms of lightweight feedback within social media were associated with their perceived social support. People perceived PDAs (e.g., Likes, Favorites, and Upvotes) as socially supportive both quantitatively and qualitatively, even without implicit meaning associated with them. People who are highly sensitive about what others think of them and have high self-esteem are more likely to perceive higher social support from PDAs.