|
|
|
|
The Individual versus CommunityA Case Study of Communication in Real Time On-line Computer Conferencingby Paul M. Summitt Communication Department University of Missouri-Columbia 1994 History suggests knowledge has undergone changes in nature since the beginning of experience on this planet. With changes in ontology and technology, many methods of communication need to be reexamined. The location of communication itself needs to be rethought. Real time, on-line computer conferencing is the use of the electronic medium known as cyberspace for group interaction. A difference that exists between communication taking place in cyberspace, or computer-mediated-communication (CMC), and face-to-face (FTF) communication lies in the use of the various dimensions of the communication itself. CMC doesn't allow for communication dimensions such as non-verbal, tone of voice, or the senses of touch or smell. FTF must consider such effects as position, proximity, and exposure (Zahn, 1991). This research investigates how users of real time on-line computer conferencing adjust for this lack of communication dimensionality and deal with each other in the medium of cyberspace. This will be accomplished by using the case study method to examine one specific on-line conference and the interactions that took place during it. Two research objectives to be examined in this paper include: the status of individuals in cyberspace and the status of the community and how both are created. Let's begin by defining computer conferencing. Neil Postman (1985) suggested that there has been a transition in the locus of truth and knowledge as society has moved through an oral tradition, into and through a literary tradition, and finally, according to Postman, into a visual tradition. Annebelle Sreberny-Mohammadi (1990) proposed a very similar structure suggesting that communication has taken three forms; orality, written, and electronic. It has been suggested previously that we are on the threshold of a fourth tradition; that of the interactive (Summitt, 1993).
It was suggested by Saussure (1974) that the oral tradition was overwhelmed by "the tyranny of writing" (p. 36). Daniel Boorstin (1971) suggested that the visual tradition "conquered . . . and received unconditional surrender" (p. 22) from the literary tradition. Arthur C. Clarke (Rheingold, 1991) suggested that virtual reality, a form of the interactive tradition, "won't merely replace TV" but will "eat it alive." The truth is that the four forms exist side-by-side. It is the locus of truth and knowledge that changes, not the form of communication. Writing changed society from being a place where "a man's word was his bond" to a place where everything from business to marriage required a contract. Television made "seeing is believing" the place where all knowledge and truth was located. Now, we move to a tradition where experience, both actual and simulated, becomes the deciding factor in both truth and knowledge. The interactive tradition both encompasses and expands the three previous traditions. No tradition ever simply replaces the previous one. Rather, the new tradition is added and often comes to dominate. Other traditions them tend to fulfill different roles. Computer conferencing takes place in that "consensual hallucination" William Gibson (1984) called cyberspace. It comes in two basic types; asynchronous and synchronous (Jensen & Chilberg, 1991). Neither require geographical coincidence, that is the participants being in the same physical location. Asynchronous computer conferencing doesn't require time coincidence. Synchronous computer conferencing does. Real-time, on-line computer conferencing requires that all participants be in the virtual conference room at the same time.
This nation is no longer, and will never again be, a nation dependant on manufacturing or agriculture for its economic interests. Information technologies contribute more to our national product than all others. We are an information society. New technologies are making this new society possible, for good or ill. The computer, and all that it is capable of, is the "defining technology" of our time (Bolter, 1984, p. 11). There are two misunderstandings that surround most research in this area. The first centers on the locus of communication in technology, that is the human tendency to apply human motives and actions to machines. It should be understood that the technology serves as a surrogate for the programmer. It is not the technology itself, but the programmer and the programming they have created with which users communicate and interact. The second misunderstanding centers on the types of effects that these new technologies can have on their users. It must be kept in mind that there are, as Salomon suggested in a 1990 article in Communication Research, both "effects of a technology" and "effects with a technology." The "effects of" a technology have to do with the final product attained while "effects with" a technology have to do with that affecting the user. The current research utilized the case study method to examine one group communicating in cyberspace. Case study research is suitable in circumstances where research questions consist of "how," "why," or exploratory "what" questions, where the analyst has little or no control over the actual behavioral events, and where the focus is on current rather than historical phenomenon. This research falls into all three of these criteria. Now, let's turn to the actual conference that this case study examines. During the summer of 1993, arrangements were made with a variety of individuals interested in the future of cyberspace to attend a real time, on-line computer conference as part of a demonstration of the phenomenon of communication in cyberspace. The demonstration was to be part of my presentation for a communication course I was taking at the University of Missouri-Columbia. It was to take place on July 7, 1993, at exactly 11:10 in the morning. Twelve individuals were invited that included three females and nine males. Those invited included programmers, broadcasters, artists, and publishers who deal with cyberspace and new technologies on a regular basis. During the two weeks prior to the demonstration the participants and I communicated via e-mail and forum messages on the commercial network CompuServe in the CyberForum to set up the agenda for the presentation. I was to be the leader of the on-line conference and direct the meeting. On the day of the presentation, as the actual conference began, the computers housing the CompuServe CyberForum crashed. I was unable to access the system and lead the on-line conference. I did present information on other areas of the new technology during the rest of my presentation. During this same time, unknown to me, the other participants kept trying to get back on the system. After finally being able to access the forum, they had the on-line conference covering the topics planned and later forwarded the resulting transcript of the discussion to me. The actual participants of this conference included five males and three females. The primary unit for analysis was the communicative turn taken by the subjects during the conference. An embedded unit of analysis were the individual participants of the conference. This study is a descriptive one. Real time, on-line computer conferencing was the intervention to be described. The context was a discussion of the future of cyberspace and new technologies. The outcomes to be described include the status of the individual, the status of the community, the types of communication taking place, and the participant reactions to the technology. These outcomes were conceptualized and measured both qualitatively and quantitatively. The site of the communication, as suggested earlier, was cyberspace. The study was longitudinal over the duration of the conference, which lasted just under thirty minutes. Reliability for this case study was addressed in the development and use of a detailed case study protocol to aid in the coding of the communication that took place during the conference. Coding schemes from both Bales (1950) and Hirokawa and Rost (1992) were used as starting points for the examination of the communication interaction. While the coding scheme for this study has both of these methods as a basis, it was decided to devise a classification scheme for this study from the interaction itself. The resulting codes were grouped into larger categories that included content, organization, and social. The Three Code Categories
This conference is seen as typical of many purpose-oriented conferences that take place in cyberspace. Data obtained through this type of historical analysis possess considerable external validity because they are derived from the analysis of actual group discussion. This would suggest a high degree of generalizability. It can not, however, be used to establish any actual relationship, but only to suggest the likelihood of such a relationship. Due to the uncontrolled nature of the field setting, there is a possibility that any observed relationship may be the result of the influence of unobserved variables in cyberspace. The transcript of the conference was coded and interactions categorized using Qualis Research Associates' The Ethnograph. A total of two hundred and forty two single utterances were coded. A single utterance is defined here as one person's comment. The data thereby attained was analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. The quantitative data were used to support qualitative insights from the observations. Let's turn now to some of the preliminary findings from this research. Since I was supposed to be the leader of the on-line conference and was unable to attend, an interesting observation concerns how long it took the group to self-select a leader and how this was accomplished. Within the first ten utterances of the conference <A> has been accepted as the leader. It's interesting to note that the first person to speak became the leader. While <A>, <B>, and <C> all had a total of three utterances each, all three of <A>'s utterances were coded as ORGANIZE compared with one each for <B> and <C>. Both <B> and <C> can be seen as trying for the leadership. <C>, having indicated that he would have to leave the conference early, provided some of the few utterances coded as FRUSTRATION.
Another sign of who the conference leader will be is the total number of utterances or frequency of each speaker. Notice that <A> has a total of 149 utterances. <B> had the second highest number of utterances. <C> left early but still had more utterances than two of the three female participants. One of the female participants, <F>, can be classified as a lurker. Although the other participants knew she was there, she only had four utterances during the conference.
Identifying others can also be a way of identifying the leader of an online conference. <A> had the most identifications, followed by <B>, then <E>, <H>, <D>, <C>, <G>, and <F>. <A> also had the most utterances coded as INSTRUCTION, COMMUNITY, SUPPORT, ORGANIZE, and OPINION.
Both the COMMUNITY and SUPPORT codes tended to center on concern for me and my resulting grade for the demonstration and presentation. The leader makes several referrals to the concern the group has for my situation. Notice that I am the focus of some humor in <E>'s statement and in <A>'s play on my last name in regard to the Summitt Conference. This research has practical significance as it may contribute to solving practical problems that users of cyberspace and CMC face. It also has theoretical significance as it contributes to our understanding of two central issues regarding humans and technology. These two issues are the construction of the self and the social construction of reality. By continuing the present research and analysis in depth, particularly with the qualitative emphasis, much more useful information may be obtained than might be gained from other more quantitative methods.
This essay ©1993-2001 Paul M. Summitt
Works CitedBales, R. (1950). Interaction process analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Bolter, D. (1984). Turing's man: Western culture in the computer age. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Boorstin, D. (1971). Democracy and its discontents: Reflections on everyday America. New York: Random House. Gibson, W. (1984). Neuromancer. New York: Ace Books. Hirokawa, R. and Rost, K. (1992). Effective group decision making in organizations: Field test of the vigilant interaction theory. Management Communications Quarterly, 5(3), pp. 267-288. Jensen, A. and Chilberg, J. (1991). Small group communication: Theory and application. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Postman, N. (1985). Amusing ourselves to death. New York: Penguin Books. Rheingold, H. (1991). Virtual Reality. New York: Simon & Schuster. Salomon, G. (1990). Cognitive effects with and of computer technology. Communication Research, 17(1), pp. 26-44. Saussure, F. de. (1974). Course in general linguistics. Glasgow: Collins. (First published in 1916). Sreberny-Mohammadi, A. Forms of media as ways of knowing. In Downing, J., Mohammadi, A., and Sreberny-Mohammadi, A. (Eds.), Questioning the media: A critical introduction, pp. 42-54. Newbury Park: Sage Publications. Summitt, P. (1993). My world and welcome to it! Zahn, G.L. (1991). Face-to-face communication in an office setting. Communication Research. 18(6), pp. 737-754. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
