Computer mediated communication

Computer in end pointediate converse1. Introduction genial web sends (SNSs) imbibe become tumesce-nigh of the most popular online destinations in recent years (comScore, 2007a, 2007b). Academic researchers attain started find come forwarding the subprogram of SNSs, with questions ranging from their role in identity construction and sort (boyd Heer, 2006) to the building and maintenance of friendly capital (e.g., Ellison, Steinfeld, Lampe, 2007) and concerns ab let on privacy (e.g., bring in Acquisti, 2005 Hodge, 2006). While these atomic number 18as of inquiry be all important and worthy of exploration, a signifi croupt antecedent question has been hugely increase Are at that position systematic interconnection between the level at which expendrs show online with their friends and offline with their counterparts, and argon mountain equally likely to act in a identical or different way comparing their online and offline life? This article sets proscribed t o lecture this question.2. Literature Review2.1Online Offline A DistinctionOnline offline bill bem intake been generalized from computing and telecommunication into the field of view of human inter own(prenominal)ized descents. The singularity between what is considered online and what is considered offline has become a subject of study in the field of selective information processing system mediated communication. The distinction between online offline is conventionally seen as the distinction between computer mediated communication and face to face communication respectively. Online is virtuality and offline is true(a)ity. Slater D. (2002533) states that the distinction is so far too candid. To support his inclination that the distinction in traffichips argon much complex than a simple online offline dichotomy, he observes that approximately quite a little draw no distinctions between an online birth much(prenominal) as including in cybersex, and offline rela tionship such(prenominal) as existence pen pals. Slater to a fault asserts that there atomic number 18 legal and regulatory pressures to reduce the distinction between online and offline with a general melt downency to befool online to offline and erase the distinction,stressing that this does non mean online relationships atomic number 18 being trim back to pre-existing offline relationships. He also conjectures that an online/offline distinction whitethorn be seen by people as rather quaint and not quite intelligible within 10 years.Individuals online activity also depends on his/her online identity or net income approximatelybodya. This online identity or lucre persona is a favorable identity that an meshing expendr establishes in online communi guides or websites. Although roughly people elect to function their real names online, most internet procedurers prefer to be anonymous, identifying themselves by means of pseudonyms, which reveal varying amounts of i n the flesh(predicate)ly placeable training.2.2FriendshipIn addition to differences in kind cues in online and offline environments, companionship is delineate differently on amicable vaneing sites than it is in offline relationships. MySpace defines Friendship as whatever kind of mutual relationship among its members. Adding a friend to a run of contacts is not necessarily an indication of feelings for that person. Rather, it is seen as an expansion of peerlesss favorable mesh topology. In an ethnographic study of teenage users, boyd (2006a) distinguishes friendship from Friendship the former refers to a secretive relationship between two people and the latter refers to an online tie that connects people on well-disposed network sites. boyd (2006a) distinguishes between several types of online Friends including underweight offline friends and acquaintances, family members, work and school mates, admired people and strangers.boyds (2006a) and Dwyers (2007) work suggest s that most users do not take online friendships seriously and consider most of them to be superficial. boyd explains that whatsoever of the relative superficiality can be attri provideded to well-disposed pressures associated with Friending (adding friends to list of contacts) online. whatsoever users, as according to boyd, (2006a25)prefer to accept Friendships with someone they ba imprecate complete rather than going finished the socially awkward process of rejecting them spell early(a)s hope that Friending a celebrity depart make them look cool.Bigge (2006) suggests that users hive away friends to increase their social capital. The element of status associated with accumulating friends may explain the large number of friends that most users contract linked to their composes. According to Rosens (2006) study, MySpace users link an average of 200 friends to their profile, m all an(prenominal) of whom they prevail never met face-to-face. This clarifies to some extent o n the way most users perception attitude towards online and offline friends.2.3Purpose of being OnlineDespite the assert superficiality of relationships, users participate in social networking sites to develop new relationships, control somemagazine(a)er friendships, and expand their social networks (Dwyer, 2007 Gallant, et al., 2007 boyd, 2006a boyd, 2007). Participants in Dwyers 2007 study indicated that they use networking sites because they come through and through an inexpensive, easy and convenient way of managing social relationships. Gallant, et al. (200721) conclude from their content outline of focus groups of MySpace and Facebook users that participants access network sites for staying in touch with friends, making social plans, communicating with other(a)s and purpose out suggestly them, and dating. In other studies, users bill the usefulness of social networking sites as a means of establishing contact with old friends and people they do not see regularly (D wyer, 2007).Online social interactions be informed by different rules and backgrounds than offline relationships. Dwyer (2007) explains that computer-mediated communication on social network sites can reduce and delay the transmission and perception of social context cues. Social context cues elicit cognitive interpretations of a given so far offt which shapes peoples communication. Dwyer explainsWhen social context cues are strongly perceived, behavior becomes much otherfocused and conservatively managed. Conversely, with communication of these cues is weak and cues are not perceived, feelings of anonymity result in more than egotism-centered and unregulated behavior.boyd (20078) suggests that online forums (as an example MySpace) provide spaces for teens to do identity work online. boyd argues that networking sites such as MySpace facilitate aspects of life substitution to teen identity formation, including exploration of social and cultural identities, social relations , and performances of the egotism. boyd (2006c) suggests that the dynamics of identity production online include a considerable emphasis on the construction of cool. Most of todays teens prefer to demonstrate cool or to be called as so. Comments on sites such as MySpace serve as organisation from peers and, boyd (2006c para. 18)argues, as a form of cultural currency. Validation as well as banish feedback online can influence users self-esteem. Valkenburg, et al. (2006) found in a study of 881 Dutch teenage users of a social network site similar to MySpace that the publicly visible feedback they received on their profiles affected their social self-esteem and well-being. Positive feedback, which nearly 80 percentage of the participants received, enhanced their self-esteem, whereas negative feedback, which seven percent of the singulars pursueed received, reduceed their self-esteem (Valkenburg, et al. 2006). This shows that the behavior of users possessing themselves online re late to their lives to some degree. On networking sites, users social networks may overlap. For instance, users may be linked to close friends, acquaintances, co-workers and family members through the same profile. The identity the user establishes online may be enamor for friends but not for relatives or co-workers (boyd, 2006a, Snyder, et al., 2006 Bigge, 2006). Due to this, some users stir their profile name or dis bunco name other than the real one to be limited within their friends circle.2.4Disclosure of users InformationUsers employ text and images in their profiles and blogs to describe who they are, what they like, and what they do. Through their posts, users send greetings, exchange messages, make plans, flirt, and maintain contact. These features of social networking sites allow users to reveal information about themselves and their lives. Stutzman (2006) suggests that while disclosing this information is optional, many users include it in their profiles. Stutzman (2006 1) attributes the high level of disclosure of personal information online to the inherent sociality of social network communities. Though many users share personal information, its validity is unproven.Some users intentionally mask their offline identities by using pseudonyms or remaining anonymous for fear of consequences link up to disclosing sensitive or socially undesirable personal characteristics. Although these strategies may mitigate users privacy concerns, unintended audiences qualification still be able to find them through friends profiles (boyd, 2007). Unintended audiences such as employers, educational institutions, law enforcement officials, and marketing companies can access and use private information that users make public online. Employers can monitor menstruation and potentiality employees through social networking sites (Bigge, 2006 Snyder, et al., 2006). Some colleges and schools keep track of their students posts on networking sites and issue offline punish ments for socially undesirable or illegal activities disclosed online (Barnes, 2006). Prosecutors and constabulary officers could potentially use online data to investigate interactions between suspects and victims (Schesser, 2006). Bigge (2006) and Barnes (2006 para 3) strike hard the fact that social network sites coordinate the interpersonal exchanges between American teens and global brands. For Snyder, et al. (2006), who analyze the terms of use document of MySpace, these unintended audiences set on the social contract of networking sites because they use the sites for information seeking rather than for networking with others.Parents and lawmakers are concerned about the behavior of teens and children online. Through legislation such as the Childrens Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (COPPA) and the 2006 Deleting Online Predators Act (DOPA), lawmakers try to protect youthfulness teenagers from social network sites by requiring public libraries and schools to install In ternet filters (boyd and Jenkins, 2006). Librarians and academics verbalized worries in response to these acts, citing concern for the development of a new digital divide in which users who rely on public access would be deprived of socializing online (Miller, 2006 boyd and Jenkins, 2006).Many parents express concerns about their childrens use of social networking sites. In a survey of 267 pairs of adolescent MySpace users and their parents, Rosen (2006) found that 63 percent of parents think that sexual predators use MySpace 81 percent of them were concerned about teens meeting online friends in offline pickles and, 88 percent of them were worried about the visiting card of sexual photos. Despite their expressed concerns, many parents are not snarled in their childrens use of social networking sites (Rosen, 2006 Rogers, et al., 2007). In Rosens (2006) study, one third of the parents did not know what kind of personal information their children were disclosing online 43 percent of them did not know how much time their children spent on social networking websites and, 62 percent of them had never talked to their children about such sites. Moreover, parents imposed little restrictions on their childrens use of these websites. Fifty percent of the teenagers surveyed in Rosens study were allowed to have computer in their bedroom and less than half of the parents set limits to their childrens computer use and the use of online sites. This is consistent with Rogers et al.s (2007) study in which barely 15 percent of the adolescent participants report having limits on their use of these Web sites.3. compendium Online intimate friendship relationship is a rare phenomenon and so could be summed up in some cases only in terms of lying and deception, they would not be so common. For many of those who have known someone intimately through the internet, the relationships have proven to be positive, if not life-changing bangs. Lies and misre monstrances have been broug ht to explain some of these tendencies but they only begin to constitute a fuller hypothetic mechanism. Research in this area often address what seems to be a working paradox in online dating sites the connection between a pragmatic, consumerist tool for meeting others wrapped up in romantic and magic discourses. Individual, social and mediatized conceptions about making love, and connecting gave us new sights into an activity whose popularity calls for reference to a broad social context. When individual engage in online communication/conversation, the spectacle in turn enhance a regime of communication that could be expound as spectral, its quality being a confessional transparency. As noticed, users will tend to describe their inner feelings in detail, well-defineding their soul in a manner that is in part imputable to the physical absence of their interlocutors. imagery will play a crucial role, and conceptions of love, past experiences, stereotypes and phantasms will be used along with the acted information gained from the communication to construct an image of the potential partner and the story of their meeting.Online daters will tend to shorten this period, in their inclination to avoid deception after having imagined someone incorrectly or having face its own deformed or incomplete projection. Problem is that the interpretation of a persons mediated representation does not always accord with the actual in-real-life presentation of that person. On other occasions, the cause of the mismatch is not misrepresentation, but simply lies. According to Albright, perhaps the lowered accountability levels of online interactions and the inability to pinpoint an online personal to a solid offline identity might foster such facades and lower peoples inhibitions about lying. It is more difficult, though, to assert that playing on online places which of course happens a lot in preaching groups, social networks and online dating sites can elapse to long lasting relationships ( particularly if they go face to face). Indeed what could be considered as playing in an overtly playful space seems to be related more to lying and concealing in other spaces, such as online dating sites, where false information about physical look and occupational status erupt. As an example, woman is prepared to meet a six feet tall lawyer could be surprised to be confront with a rather a short programmer or even a child.Flirting and playing go to rileher, but the lack of physical proximity between dyadic partners opens the door to misrepresentation. But as a matter of fact, playing with ones body, personality and social status can also lead to sexual dysfunctions, cheating and criminal deviance such as harassment, rape or pedophilia. Playing is ok as long as every participant actually knows that he/she is in playing frame, which is not always the case online. There exist online places such as punt life where playing with gender, physical characteristic s and personality is the norm. Flirting and intimate relationships abound there as well but the rules are clear this is granular and you can play as such.Whitty et,al (2001624) rateEven if people are not engaging in cybersex or exchanging photos, we cannot disregard the importance of body or physical attraction. This is because- even in absence of photographs- bodies are hypothesize through users imaginations. Moreover, imaginations can give fantasized vision of the self and the others.Whitty et al, (2001) use notions such as play potential space, transitional objects and splitting to construct a probing psychoanalytical lecture about online beg. Psychoanalytic approach that Whitty Carr (2001623) sayPlay is all about illusion , such illusion can only be sustained provided play can be unplowed within a frame work of its own- a frame which seeks to split up it from ordinary life.The objective of online dating sites is to change online connection rapidly in the hope of developing intimate relationships (Casual sex or Cybersex). In discussion groups or SNSs, the point is to allow perspective couples to meet online, then may be offline, in the hope of finding people who will deduce each others feelings, share their own and eventually (in some situations) become more intimate.The very sense of a body attached to personal information could be considered to be more important in dating sites than in discussion groups, since the goals- which may still be the same for some users- are not dealt with in the same way. As a matter of fact, departure an online profile with no photographs is giving oneself no chance of being contacted. In an online community, people get to know each other based on shared interests, not with perceived physical attractiveness of the participants. In theory, this works, but in fact, online flirting happens everywhere, even where it is not assumed to. How users who experience online romance define romance and love at large prior to and dur ing their online explorations has not been thoroughly discussed by internet researchers as such.Before reading profiles on an online dating sites or being interested in the person cornerstone certain online discussion posting on a community sites, a user hold wealth of personal conception about what he/she is/isnt, likes/dislikes, loves/hates and so on. This conception may change in the course of ones online intimate experience that could provide critical insight into the individual social integration of online connection.However, according to Anderson (2005), people who experience online romance do it in miscellaneous online places but one thing they share is that they can conceive of finding love by using the internets online connection.In terms of finding love online, for many of us, it is not an easy thing. Working long hours, some of them alone, others at remote places, feeling caught in an improper relationship, being tired of a series of dreams with no tomorrows, lacking the confidence to face interesting prospects or just wanting to try something that supposedly works well, millions of people have been drawn to the internet over last few years, looking for individuals with whom to hap and to bond.That is probably why many online researchers have ascertained that online intimacy is make up and maintained mainly by practice, commitment and high level of self disclosure. It is difficult to theoretical framework that fully describes what is going on and when (two or) more people are flirting on the web or not. If individuals are to successfully develop a romantic relationship from an online dating site, they submit to present a balance between an attractive and a real self on their profiles. Observing that online daters tend to meet each other fece to face more quickly than do participation in other kinds of online based relationships, Whitty(2001) suggests, in doing so, they can and want to avoid the frequent lies and embellishments associated wit h personal profiles. Also she holds that it shuts up the potential presence of a true self (referring to what someone would like to be, but is not yet able to be), which, in theory, emerges slowly, coupled with high self-disclosure, institutionalize and commitment. On another side, as she observed in her research, at the same time a seeking out authentic and genuine profiles, individuals were also looking for the more attractive and likable profiles. Engaging on an online conversation, knowing friends friends on any SNSs, or pose a profile on an online dating agency is easy and well-worn in itself. But it can lead to profound changes in ones life. everywhere recent years, many researchers have communicate romantic relationships initiated on the internet.4. Overview on HypothesisThe hypothesis set out in this composition includes the change in the perception delinquent to shift of online relations to offline relation and vice-versa, advantages and disadvantages of doing it with regards to the use of SNSs through the internet. To establish and get into the hypothesis set out in here, individual interviews have been employed in order to fully get into the subject. Except the individual short interviews, content analysis of the papers related to the use of SNSs as well as the survey questionnaires were also intentional and disseminated to 55 international students of the two universities in Cyprus University of capital of Cyprus The European University Cyprus.As we are facing the world of fast-changing pace, it is hard to generalize the finding from the study of such a small group of people. However, the results obtained so far will give genuine insights to further research in the same area. carry offline relations to online seems very easy provided that the users real life friends or relatives are facilitated through the use of the internet or else they have not been regarded as the victims caused by the so called digital divide. On the other hand, bring ing online relations to offline may result to both advantages and disadvantages. The term trust has more to play the role in it. Because some people show their trust to the people met online that the information provided by them online are factual and true, whereas some do not find any trust in those information. It requires a sort of experience or say, the psychological knowledge to understand the motive of the strangers met online to decide whether or not he/she should meet him/her offline. In this regard, a genuine person who always flows true and factual information through the internet and holds mightily desire of friending through online process may be the victim of some who do not trust online friends any more. The current fears of internet fraud, identity theft and the fakesters have constantly loosened in the extent of trust among the moderate internet users. Spam, junk mail and many other alien mails coming everyday into the inbox are also the cause in declining the trus t in the internet.Bringing offline relations to online seems the everyday routine of most of the internet users. The use of internet and its know-how is growing rapidly throughout the world. Today, many rely on the internet and cannot even think of their lives without being into it. Internet users even tend to see their offline friends online with the motive of being able to contact at any time, and also know how they are up to though they are physically very far. With regards to strangers online meeting them in real life situations seem unpredictable for everyone. For some, it is like a game as well as an interesting part of their life. Doing so, many get engaged for long time relationships, some as business partners and so on.5.MethodsTo accomplish the objective of the paper, triple methodologies have been incorporated Interviews Survey Content Analysis 5.1InterviewsInterviews conducted is the semi-structured consisting of 12 individuals who have their profiles on social network ing sites many of them being on facebook and Hi5. Interview questions (see Apendix) ranges from their demographics information, perceptions and appreciation of online communications, involvement in SNSs, chatting preferences, time spent on the internet as well as the views on friends online/offline. Only the information obtain from individual semi-structured interviews were insufficient to come answer the proposal question raised in the paper. Hence other methods of research have also been carried out. Interview took place in different physical locations in Cyprus and just about 6 individuals were interviewed online through facebook.5.2SurveyA set of questionnaire was designed and disseminated to 55 international students of the two universities (University of Nicosia European University Cyprus) in Cyprus. The set of questionnaire consists of questionnaire that consists of 33 questions splitting them in trey sections (see Appendix). The first section (section A) consists of 6 qu estions and collects the participants demographic information such as A/S/L, married status, occupation, country of origin enate education. inclusion of parental education in the demographic information is aimed to find whether participants parental education level is linked with their online offline perceptions or behaviors. 21 questions on the abutting section (Section B) address on the participants involvement with the internet, its use. More use or the less use of the internet and the time spent on any social network sites by any individual can be the basis to reveal the participants behaviors and perceptions regarding online/offline friends and connections. Last section of the questionnaire (Section C) is an attempt to explore the users online and offline behaviors, expectations, language used and the priority among online or offline friends. This section includes 6 questions all of which address how users intend to establish connections to their online friends (strangers and not strangers) and offline friends in their real life situations. 5.3Content AnalysisMany studies have been carried out on the issues of social network sites and their use. Distinguishing the users and non-users of social networks sites has also been studied. Stutzmans.(2006) An evaluation of identity-sharing behavior in social network communities has addressed a bit of online and offline behaviours of the internet users being focused on social network sites. Danah m boyd has been continually contributing to the social network sites and their use through her study. More and more sequential research made by boyd regarding the use of internet especially focusing teenagers have given more insights for accomplishing this paper. These two researchers are the basis to ground the theoretical aspects ranging from the meaning of SNSs to their use, internet persona as well as identity construction online. Hence, this paper also uses the content analysis approach of the study carried out b y these two researchers in the field of social network sites and their use, but in a brief.6.Results Discussion on FindingsDemographicsThe study sample of international students taken from the two universities in Cyprus is skewed towards more male around 71.7%, egg-producing(prenominal) users being only 28.3% of total 55 students, 55.7% were Nepalese whereas the rest (36.3%) were Indian background. Regarding the parental education of the participants, fathers of 30% participants were postgraduates and none of the participants father were illiterate. 15 % of the participants reported that their mothers are illiterate. The age of the sample size of this study ranges from 18-30 years. With reference to the marital status, 54.5% were single and 45.5% were married. None of the participants were reported to be in a relationship or divorced. Results obtained from 12 individual semi-structure interviews are more consistent with the results obtained from the survey and hence the following results and discussion does not fully mention the interviews due to the space problem in this paper. However, the interviews have been the basis to carry out the study and bring it to the final readable form.Internets UseRegarding the average use of internet per week (see table 2), no womanly person participants use internet for more than 15 hours a week. Majority of male (30.9%) were reported to use internet up to 15 hours a week whereas only 16.3% female do so, the study shows. The first task of the users while connecting to the internet, 27% state they check mails (46% female and 20% male), 18% open messenger (26 % female 15% male), 18% browse for news (25 % male) and around 37% open social network sites (26% female 40% male). The term Social network Sites was not known to any of the participants in the sample. When it first appeared in the questionnaire, participants raised the question to the real indication of SNS. Participants were then asked whether they have known or he ard of SNSs. c % participants said that it is a complete unknown term for them. When they are clarified with the term SNSs, speed of light% reported that they have their profiles in at least one or more SNSs. Of many SNSs around the world available to everyone in the internet, sample said that they know only 7 SNSs of 16 SNSs mentioned in the questionnaire. Facebook, Hi5 and Bebo are the three social network sites that all participants have heard of and also have their profiles. The table 1 below is the illustration of knowing of SNSs reported by the sample of the study.Social networking sites respondents profileSNSsRespondentsTotalMaleFemaleOrkut52%38%53%Windows Live Space36%26.6%29%LinkedIn14.5%15%13.3%Bebo100%100%100%MySpace34%37.5%26.6%Facebook100%100%100%Hi5100%100%100%Table 1As the sample recorded that the participants have their profile at least in one or more SNSs. It is now vital to get the data on how real are the information placed on their profiles taking into serious considerations on names, gender, age, location etc. 80% said