Você está na página 1de 6

Computer-mediated communication

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


For other uses, see CMC (disambiguation).
Computer-mediated communication (CMC) is defined as any human communication that
occurs through the use of two or more electronic devices.[1] While the term has
traditionally referred to those communications that occur via computer-mediated
formats (e.g., instant messaging, email, chat rooms, online forums, social netw
ork services), it has also been applied to other forms of text-based interaction
such as text messaging.[2] Research on CMC focuses largely on the social effect
s of different computer-supported communication technologies. Many recent studie
s involve Internet-based social networking supported by social software.
Contents [hide]
1
Scope of the field
2
Characteristics
3
Language learning
4
Benefits
5
See also
6
References
7
Further reading
Scope of the field[edit]
Scholars from a variety of fields study phenomena that can be described under th
e umbrella term of CMC (see also Internet studies). For example, many take a soc
iopsychological approach to CMC by examining how humans use "computers" (or digi
tal media) to manage interpersonal interaction, form impressions and form and ma
intain relationships.[3][4] These studies have often focused on the differences
between online and offline interactions, though contemporary research is moving
towards the view that CMC should be studied as embedded in everyday life .[5] An
other branch of CMC research examines the use of paralinguistic features such as
emoticons,[6] pragmatic rules such as turn-taking[7] and the sequential analysi
s and organization of talk,[8][9] and the various sociolects, styles, registers
or sets of terminology specific to these environments (see Leet). The study of l
anguage in these contexts is typically based on text-based forms of CMC, and is
sometimes referred to as "computer-mediated discourse analysis".[10]
The way humans communicate in professional, social, and educational settings var
ies widely, depending upon not only the environment but also the method of commu
nication in which the communication occurs, which in this case is through comput
ers or other information and communication technologies (ICTs). The study of com
munication to achieve collaboration common work products is termed computer-supporte
d collaboration and includes only some of the concerns of other forms of CMC res
earch.
Popular forms of CMC include e-mail, video, audio or text chat (text conferencin
g including "instant messaging"), bulletin board systems, list-servs and MMOs.[1
1] These settings are changing rapidly with the development of new technologies.
Weblogs (blogs) have also become popular, and the exchange of RSS data has bett
er enabled users to each "become their own publisher".
Characteristics[edit]
Communication occurring within a computer-mediated format has an effect on many
different aspects of an interaction. Some of these that have received attention
in the scholarly literature include impression formation, deception, group dynam
ics, disclosure reciprocity, disinhibition and especially relationship formation
.
CMC is examined and compared to other communication media through a number of as
pects thought to be universal to all forms of communication, including (but not
limited to) synchronicity, persistence or "recordability", and anonymity. The as
sociation of these aspects with different forms of communication varies widely.
For example, instant messaging is intrinsically synchronous but not persistent,
since one loses all the content when one closes the dialog box unless one has a
message log set up or has manually copy-pasted the conversation. E-mail and mess
age boards, on the other hand, are low in synchronicity since response time vari
es, but high in persistence since messages sent and received are saved. Properti

es that separate CMC from other media also include transience, its multimodal na
ture, and its relative lack of governing codes of conduct.[12] CMC is able to ov
ercome physical and social limitations of other forms of communication and there
fore allow the interaction of people who are not physically sharing the same spa
ce.
The medium in which people choose to communicate influences the extent to which
people disclose personal information. CMC is marked with higher levels of self-d
isclosure in conversation as opposed to face-to-face interactions.[13] Self disc
losure is any verbal communication of personally relevant information, thought,
and feeling which establishes and maintains interpersonal relationships.[14] Thi
s is due in part to visual anonymity and the absence of nonverbal cues which red
uce concern for losing positive face. According to Walther s (1996) hyperpersonal
communication model, computer-mediated communication is valuable on providing a
better communication and better first impressions. Moreover, Ramirez and Zhang (
2007) indicate that computer-mediated communication allows more closeness and at
traction between two individuals than a face-to-face communication.[15]
Anonymity and in part privacy and security depends more on the context and parti
cular program being used or web page being visited. However, most researchers in
the field acknowledge the importance of considering the psychological and socia
l implications of these factors alongside the technical "limitations".
Language learning[edit]
Main article: Language learning software
CMC is widely discussed in language learning because CMC provides opportunities
for language learners to practice their language.[16] For example, Warschauer[17
] conducted several case studies on using email or discussion boards in differen
t language classes. Warschauer[18] claimed that information and communications t
echnology bridge the historic divide between speech and writing . Thus, considerabl
e concern has arisen over the reading and writing research in L2 due to the boom
ing of the Internet.
Benefits[edit]
The nature of CMC means that it is easy for individuals to engage in communicati
on with others regardless of time or location. CMC allows for individuals to col
laborate on projects that would otherwise be impossible due to such factors as g
eography. [19] In addition, CMC can also be useful for allowing individuals who
might be intimidated due to factors like character or disabilities to participat
e in communication. By allowing an individual to communicate in a location of th
eir choosing, CMC call allow a person to engage in communication with minimal st
ress. [20] Making an individual comfortable through CMC also plays a role in sel
f-disclosure, which allows a communicative partner to open up more easily and be
more expressive. When communicating through an electronic medium, individuals a
re less likely to engage in stereotyping and are less self-conscious about physi
cal characteristics. The role that anonymity plays in online communication can a
lso encourage some users to be less defensive and form relationships with others
more rapidly.[21]
See also[edit]
Emotions in virtual communication
Internet relationship
References[edit]
Jump up ^ McQuail, Denis. (2005). Mcquail's Mass Communication Theory. 5th ed. L
ondon: SAGE Publications.
Jump up ^ Thurlow, C., Lengel, L. & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer mediated communic
ation: Social interaction and the internet. London: Sage.
Jump up ^ Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, in
terpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3-43.
Jump up ^ Walther, J. B., & Burgoon, J. K. (1992). Relational communication in c
omputer-mediated interaction. Human Communication Research, 19, 50-88.
Jump up ^ Haythornthwaite, C. and Wellman, B. (2002). The Internet in everyday l
ife: An introduction. In B. Wellman and C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Internet
in Everyday Life (pp. 3-41). Oxford: Blackwell.
Jump up ^ Skovholt, K., Grnning, A. and Kankaanranta, A. (2014), The Communicativ

e Functions of Emoticons in Workplace E-Mails: :-). Journal of Computer-Mediated


Communication, 19: 780 797. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12063
Jump up ^ Garcia, A. C., & Jacobs, J. B. (1999). The eyes of the beholder: Under
standing the turn-taking system in quasi-synchronous computer-mediated communica
tion. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 32, 337-367.
Jump up ^ Herring, S. (1999). Interactional coherence in CMC. Journal of Compute
r-Mediated Communication, 4(4).
Jump up ^ Markman, K. M. (2006). Computer-mediated conversation: The organizatio
n of talk in chat-based virtual team meetings. Dissertation Abstracts Internatio
nal, 67 (12A), 4388. (UMI No. 3244348)
Jump up ^ Herring, S. C. (2004). Computer-mediated discourse analysis: An approa
ch to researching online behavior. In: S. A. Barab, R. Kling, and J. H. Gray (Ed
s.), Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning (pp. 338-376).
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Jump up ^ Bishop, J. (2009). Enhancing the understanding of genres of web-based
communities: The role of the ecological cognition framework. International Journ
al of Web-Based Communities, 5(1), 4-17.
Jump up ^ McQuail, Denis. (2005). Mcquail's Mass Communication Theory. 5th ed. L
ondon: SAGE Publications.
Jump up ^ Jiang, C., Bazarova, N., & Hancock, J. (2011). From perception to beha
vior: Disclosure reciprocity and the intensification of intimacy in computer-med
iated communication. Communication Research, 40, 125-143.
Jump up ^ Jiang, C., Bazarova, N., & Hancock, J. (2011). From perception to beha
vior: Disclosure reciprocity and the intensification of intimacy in computer-med
iated communication. Communication Research, 40, 125-143.
Jump up ^ Dunn., R., 2013. Identity Theories and Technology. p.30. East Tennesse
e State University, USA.
Jump up ^ Abrams, Z. (2006). From Theory to Practice: Intracultural CMC in the L
2 Classroom. book chapter, forthcoming in Ducate, Lara & Nike Arnold (Eds.) Call
ing on CALL: From Theory and Research to New Directions in Foreign Language Teac
hing.
Jump up ^ Warschauer, M. (1998). Electronic literacies: Language, culture and po
wer in online education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Jump up ^ Warschauer, M. (2006). Laptops and literacy: learning in the wireless
classroom: Teachers College, Columbia University.
Jump up ^ Crum, "Advantages and Disadvantages of Computer Mediated Communication
"
Jump up ^ Lane, "Computer-Mediated Communication in the Classroom: Asset or Liab
ility?"
Jump up ^ Schouten, Valkenburg & Peter, "An Experimental Test of Processes Under
lying Self-Disclosure in Computer-Mediated Communication".
Further reading[edit]
Ahern, T.C., Peck, K., & Laycock, M. (1992). The effects of teacher discourse in
computer-mediated discussion. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 8(3),
291-309.
Angeli, C., Valanides, N., & Bonk, C.J. (2003). Communication in a web-based con
ferencing system: The quality of computer-mediated interactions. British Journal
of Educational Technology, 34(1), 31-43.
Bannan-Ritland, B. (2002). Computer-mediated communication, elearning, and inter
activity: A review of the research. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(2)
, 161-180.
Christopher, M.M., Thomas, J.A., and Tallent-Runnels, M.K. (2004). Raising the B
ar: Encouraging high level thinking in online discussion forums. Roeper Review,
26(3), 166-171.
Cooper, M.M., & Selfe, C.L. (1990). Computer conferences and learning: Authority
, resistance, and internally persuasive discourse. College English, 52(8), 847-8
69.
Forman, E.A. (2000). Knowledge building in discourse communities. Human Developm
ent, 43(6), 364-368. doi:10.1159/000022697
Gabriel, M.A. (2004). Learning together: Exploring group interactions online. Jo

urnal of Distance Education, 19(1), 54-72.


Gerrand, P. (2007), Estimating Linguistic Diversity on the Internet: A Taxonomy
to Avoid Pitfalls and Paradoxes. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12:
1298 1321. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00374.x
Gilbert, K.G., & Dabbagh, N. (2005). How to structure online discussions for mea
ningful discourse: a case study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(1
), 5-18.
Gunawardena, C.H., Nolla, A.C., Wilson, P.L., Lopez-Isias, Jr. et al. (2001). A
cross-cultural study of group process and development in online conferences. Dis
tance Education, 22(1), 85-122.
Hara, N., Bonk, C.J., & Angeli, C. (2000). Content analysis of online discussion
in an applied educational psychology course. Instructional Science, 28, 115-152
.
Herring, S. (Ed.), Stein, D. (Ed.) & Virtanen, T. (Ed.) (2013). Pragmatics of Co
mputer-Mediated Communication. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton
Hewitt, J. (2001). Beyond threaded discourse. International Journal of Education
al Telecommunications, 7(3), 207-221.
Hewitt, J. (2003). How habitual online practices affect the development of async
hronous discussion threads. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 28(1), 31
-45.
Javela, S., Bonk, C.J., & Sirpalethti, S.L. (1999). A theoretical analysis of so
cial interactions in computer-based learning environments: Evidence for reciproc
al understandings. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 21(3), 363-388.
Jones, G., & Schieffelin, B. (2009). Enquoting Voices, Accomplishing Talk: Uses
of Be+Like in Instant Messaging. Language & Communication, 29(1), 77-113.
Jones, G., & Schieffelin, B. (2009). Talking Text and Talking Back: "My BFF Jill
" from Boob Tube to YouTube. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4),
1050 - 1079.
Kalman, Y.M. & Rafaeli, S. (2011). Online pauses and silence: Chronemic expectan
cy violations in written computer-mediated communication. Communication Research
, 38 (1) 54-69.
Lapadat, J.C. (2003). Teachers in an online seminar talking about talk: Classroo
m discourse and school change. Language and Education, 17(1), 21-41.
Leinonen, P., Jarvela, S., & Lipponen, L. (2003). Individual students interpretat
ions of their contribution to the computer-mediated discussions. Journal of Inte
ractive Learning Research, 14(1), 99-122.
Lin, L. (2008). An online learning model to facilitate learners rights to educati
on. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks (JALN), 12(1), pp. 127 143. [Special
issue distributed by Sloan-C JALN in collaboration with five other internationa
l journals: http://www.distanceandaccesstoeducation.org/]
Lin, L., Cranton, P. & Bridglall, B. (2005). Psychological type and asynchronous
written dialogue in adult learning. Teachers College Record, 107(8), 1788-1813.
MackNnight, C.B. (2000). Teaching critical thinking through online discussions.
Educause Quarterly, 4, 38-41.
Poole, D.M. (2000). Student participation in a discussion-oriented online course
: A case study. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(2), 162-176.
Schrire, S. (2003). A model for evaluating the process of learning in asynchrono
us computer conferencing. Journal of Instructional Delivery Systems, 17(1), 6-12
.
Vonderwell, S. (2002). An examination of asynchronous communication experiences
and perspectives of students in an online course: A case study. The Internet and
Higher Education, 6, 77-90.
Wade, S.E., & Fauske, J.R. (2004). Dialogue online: Prospective teachers discours
e strategies in computer-mediated discussions. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(2)
, 134-160.
Wu, D., & Hiltz, S.R. (2004). Predicting learning from asynchronous online discu
ssions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(2), 139-152.
[show] v t e
Computer-mediated communication
[show] v t e

Communication studies
Categories: Computer-mediated communicationApplied linguisticsInformation system
sSocial sciencesInternet culture
Navigation menu
Not logged inTalkContributionsCreate accountLog inArticleTalkReadEditView histor
y
Search
Go
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
???????
?????????
Deutsch
Eesti
Franais
??????
Italiano
?????
Latvie u
Nederlands
???
Norsk bokml
Polski
Portugus
Sloven cina
Suomi
Tagalog
??????????
??
Edit links
This page was last modified on 30 April 2016, at 14:37.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; add
itional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and P
rivacy Policy. Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, I

nc., a non-profit organization.

Você também pode gostar