Validity of Communication
 

I know that for me, in the moment, the feelings are just as real as any other. However, in hindsight, in reflection... are the sensations you get with online interaction as valid as those you get with actual physical face to face interaction?

Does communication with only a couple senses in action cheapen in comparison with communication with even more senses to experience?

I can make people laugh, smile, and enjoy themselves just by talking to them online. Is that not worth as much as if it had been done in person?

If there is a distinction between online and the physical world, do you feel that cyberspace sensations could ever potentially rank with those felt in the 'real' world?

Now, I'm not talking about replacement. It's a simple fact of life that humans NEED contact in order to develope. You cannot substitute actual care and attention with an electronic equivalent. I'm merely speaking about the social validity.

I know of a few strictly internet couples on the TFP. Some are unashamed to admit it. Some keep it on the down low.

I would like to hear the reasoning behind everyone's feelings, please.

-------

In my opinion, I see the internet as the.. 6th sense, so to speak. It's a new way to interact; to know the world around you. Though, for those who do not have much experience with it, or who are skeptical of it, this might sound like a complete waste of breath. It's impossible to ignore that in the coming years, the internet will spread into everyone's daily lives more and more, and its unique brand of communication will reach out to those who have never even considered it before. Though I may be asking for your opinions now, I feel that it may be too early for many of you to even offer it. Never the less, I am interested in the general opinion.

Interesting questions Hal.

When talking online you'd think it'd be far harder to make someone laugh, or someone would be less likely to laugh, because the only thing they see is text, not facial expressions or subtle hints about appropriateness to laugh, or show surprise, etc. Also if the other person can't see your reaction to what they're saying (eg. MSN Messenger) and they something that's supposed to be funny, then you're not likely to laugh politely, you'll just say 'lol' and leave it at that.

But I often find that's not quite true. I know I laugh a lot more easily online than I do in real life, and most often when I write 'lol' I'll actually be chuckling or grinning in real life. I think it might be because when text is the only way of communication it leaves a lot to be desired. You can't see all the subtleties, it's rushed and direct and the writing isn't developed. So in these cases I think it's easy to laugh or feel bad about something that isn't really that funny or depressing, and that's because I think the reader tends to inject more of him or herself into what they're reading.

I guess I find it hard to explain but it's like when you have a crush on someone you hardly know, they're automatically the greatest person in the world because what you don't know about them you fill with your imagination, and it's always something good. 'What kind of movies does she like? The same ones I do, I bet...' I think that on an instant messaging program we use our imagination to beef up what someone else is saying and we fill in the blanks with what we think, which is always automatically good.

When it comes to a message board I think it's a bit different because most people, on the TFP at least, use full sentences and spend some time making their post more than just readable, and so the less imagination we have to put into deciphering or interpreting someone else's words I think the more 'real' that communication is. Perhaps not lifelike but still valid and meaningful because the more meaning they convey, the less meaning we have to supply ourselves. Oral communication is still made up of our own intepretations and meaning, so it's never simply someone else's words.

I'm rambling, but this looks to become a great topic.

I think that communication online is a lot more limited than face-to-face. It's harder to inject nuances to what you say, and people often might just add their own nuances.

For example, I have a very sarcastic sense of humour, and I never use smilies. So when I make a joke online a lot of people think I'm just being outright nasty.

So yes, I think online communication does cheapen in comparison to face-to-face communication, as it's so direct and inflexible.

It depends on what form of online communication I am utilising. If it's just text then I am unable to find it as stimulating as the in person variety. However if you add in microphones and webcams, then it's almost as if you are talking to them in person, and I can feel the majority of the emotions I would feel were it to be an offline communication. I can deffinately say though that I can have thorougly enjoyable online conversations, which compare to that of the face-to-face variety.

A few years ago, after a car accident, I couldn't really get around very well so I found myself in front of my computer. I would literally sit there for hours in chat rooms talking to people. In a way it was therapy for me. I didn't talk much to my friends about the accident and the resulting fallout, but I could talk about it to these complete strangers online.

Through the years I met some really great people. And some really not great people. Do I still talk to them all? Of course not. Just like I don't talk to anyone from high school. You grow up and soon you lose touch. I've got one friend who I've been talking to for nearly 4 years now. He's been a really great friend to me, and even though we don't hang out face to face on a regular basis, I don't consider him any less of a friend than people I see all of the time. In fact, I think he's a better friend than some people I've known for years. I did have the chance to go visit him twice, and I'm glad I did. I'm sure in the future if we have the chance we'll hang out again.

As most people know around here, I'm a part of one of those TFP couples. Sometimes I can get a bit weird about it. Since I've been here, I've seen quite a few TFP couples come and go. Some started strictly digitally. People proclaiming love and never having met face to face. That's just weird to me. But hey, to each their own right? With me, it didn't start out like that. It started out with an offer for a date, and I figured what the hell, why not. I didn't really talk to my boyfriend much before that, noticed his posts some but that was about it. So when that offer was on the table we started chatting and emailing back and forth. I didn't want to go spend the day with a complete stranger. And as we talked we got along well, and that date went great as well. And the rest is history I guess.

So what am I saying? Online relationships - friendships or romantic - can be just as valid as any other form of relationship.

I must agree. I have a very dry sense of humor. The only way someone can tell if I am being serious or not is if that person can see my face. It is very hard to put emotion into text.

I would think the interactions we develop with others in this media are a compliment to those that take place outside it. Many of the "Friends" I develop in this forum for example, project much of what I would look for in a local relationship with an aquaintance. The rarity of finding a powerful friendship without the physical interaction would make such a relationship even more unique, and therefore exceptional to my mind.

Deep in the psyche of us all is the need to be recognized, and this type of interaction allows for this, without the fear of skeletons walking out of the closet. We can each share that part of us we wish others to see, and are in this way limiting our exposure to pain. Relationships develop through Communication, and what we decide to project dictates the path of our communications. It is always pertinent to keep in mind the limitations of internet relationships, but that should in no way diminish the Value of such.

We are all who we decide to project to the world.

I beleive that at the moment with pure text communcation you are losing a huge amount of information that you would otherwise pick up through seeing a persons body language, facial expressions etc - you have to fill in the gaps yourself. I have never met anyone in real life who I have initially only had an internet relationship with so I don't know if there is any disparagy between the person you assume they are through the bits you've had to fill in and the person they actually are in real life. I reckon that as technology gets better the gap between real and virtual communication with respect to information loss will lessen until it's negligable - these message boards will one day be realtime streaming video and we'll all harken back to the simpler days of text only (y'see in my day)

i think i keep some sense of how this is online, and as such...is just more *fragile* than in person, if that makes sense.

a global power failure tomorrow, and i would never see any of you again...or whatever. but i try to take it seriously that it's real people on the other end. show a little trust, open up a bit...and teh rewards are definitely worth reaping.

Relationships can be falsified in any context. I'd say it's the quality and authenticity that occurs in the relationship and not the medium that impacts the validity of communication. I don't see any necessary difference between media, ways, methods, or means of relating - especially as regards validity.

I knew a girl by talking to her online for 2 years... and then we got together and were a couple, strictly online. Yeah, we got to see each other for about a week twice a year, but that was it for about 3 years. We broke up after she moved down here to live with me, but for completely separate reasons- we were still growing up, and because we didn't grow up together, we grew apart. But I still think that online was a wonderful place for our love. True, emotion and nuance are hard in text, but I felt that after a while, you could pick up on the other person's tone, and know how they'd say something without hearing their voice.

I know the online communication and community could never replace physical human interaction. At least it shouldn't. Science has shown repeatedly that the human touch makes such an impact on our development and physical health.

Personally - I crave the cyber communication. I run a home day care and rarely leave the house some of the winter months. I interact with my husband and the kids but it's not sufficient. Hubby can't be asked to provide all my adult conversation when he deals with people all day long and enjoys a little quiet alone time in he evening. My 4 yr old daughter and the other younger children are obviously not much for adult conversation. So I learn and interact with many here and on chat on and off throughout the day. Without this interaction I get lonely and irritable with hubby. I enjoy being on the phone as well which still lacks the physical aspect but allows the auditory/oral part of communication to come into play. I think we need all different types of communication. I think it might even possible that we need communication that relys only on the solitary words on paper or on a computer screen. Reading does trigger different brain development than oral speaking. I think this would be interesting to do a study on - not sure where one would begin though.

I think an online relationship can be just as valid.

You may even become closer with the person that you ever would have in person, depending on individual personalities. I personally take a while to form my thoughts, so in person, I appear to not always have an answer, but I just like to think about what I say before spouting off.

Also, I think the whole anonimity of the internet allows people to let their guards down and not be so reserved...because if they get scared, freedom if just a browser close away.

I realize that this also opens the door for people to present themselves falsely, but once an online relationship progresses to the point of actually getting to know the person, usually I think it becomes evident whether they are being true or not.

btw, I want to point out I do think the two are very different types of relationships, but believe both can be meaningful ones.

In any communication, face-to-face, written, phone, whatever, there's a huge amount of room for interpretation on the part of the person receiving the communication. Each medium just leaves different aspects of the interaction open for more or less interpretation. With phone you get inflection but not facial expressions, in person you get non-verbal and verbal communication but there's no way to remember what really happened later, with written communication you get a record but no nuance, with electronic communication you get immediacy and permanence but no inflection, etc. Bottom line, communication is a crap shoot and you need to be aware of what message you're sending and not sending in any given medium.

There is substantially more to communication than what is said and with the internet all that there is is what is said, and generally our proficiency with that isn't quite what it ought to be to effectively replace good ole' fashioned face time.

Dude, you're startin' to sound like Art.

that's correct and thank you for the reminder.

I repeat myself and ask other's to repeat back what they understand all the time... and still there's miscommunication.

I have personally found online communication perfectly adequate for most uses. Humor usually comes across fairly well as long as it is not too subtle. However I have real problems with carrying on an emotional conversation on a computer. I much prefer face to face. For instance just last week I was talking to a girl online who said she had a bad week. I found out later in the conversation that something really bad happened and expressed my shock at it badly through writing. This is how is seemed to play out judging by the response. I may be mistaken since I applied my way a writing style and wordage matches a phrase's meaning to what she wrote, which could (I hope) be in error. I simply feel that unless you are a superb writer, much of the information which is meant to be transferred is lost. I feel similarly about phones. Although they are much better than writing online, it still leaves out the vital non-verbal communication that is so important in decoding what someone is saying.

Just my 2-cents. I hope I made sense.

That is exactly how my wife described it when she ran a home daycare. Once she pointed that out to me, I began to see the importance of her wanting to talk about every little thing that she had on her mind.

Interesting that you mentioned phone conversations. When my wife did day care, she talked to another provider during nap time every day. My wife and that provider seemed to be quite good friends and we did a lot of things together as couples for many years. Once my wife started work outside the home, that relationship changed and now none of us have anything to do with each other (except my wife and I of course).

Allright, without anyone killing me for making up statistics...

I READ somewhere (haha) that communication is:
10% words that are said, and the context.
20% tone of voice
70% non-verbal communication (body language)

So I think that when on-line, I have to be extra careful with the 10% that I have.

There are several ways that communication can get fucked up. Look at the process ->
I think about what I want to say -> coding the message
I say it, with several options for the media -> transmission
You recieve the message HOW YOU HEARD IT -> reception
You interpret what I said, using your previous experience and knowledge base -> de-coding

Looking at the process, how could anyone ever understand what the hell I ever say? At any step there could be a distortion in the message. Why do you think that half of the threads on boards get 'hijacked'? Do a search term on TFP using the phrase "Dude, you misunderstood me..."

queries, suggestions, clarifications needed?