Self-Disclosure In A Grief Observed By C. S.

“People can take their time when posting information about themselves, carefully selecting what aspects they would like to emphasize (Gonzales 80).” By controlling what information and self-attributes to share with the online world, an individual may present an idealized version of self that would not align with societal perceptions in the face-to-face interactions. Furthermore, Gonzales notes that recent research in computer-mediated communications suggests that online self-presentations can alter self-perceptions (80). As Orenstein says, “I tweet, therefore I am.” The online presentations of self can become the reality, or idealized reality, of the

Over the past decade, a visible social movement has been induced by the uprising of media and websites. However, it has undoubtedly peaked during the last couple of years. With the steady establishment of new social networks, there are varying viewpoints regarding the time the majority of people spend fixed to a screen. This is certainly food for thought. Is society isolating itself from face-to-face contact and resorting to online relationships? Possibly. But are such actions always critical and destructive? Opinions range on the subject. Through the analyzation of the argument, using examples such as an article by Barry Cooper, "Infatuation with Facebook friends knows no limits," the common myth of Echo and Narcissus, and a personal perspective,

There are many ethical issues when considering how to handle research on grief and bereaving on social media and blogs. Do the bloggers and users of social media have the same rights to privacy that people have when the source is paper/written? This article, Exploiting Loss?: Ethical Considerations, Boundaries, and Opportunities for the Study of Death and Grief online, focuses on six ethical issues when studying death and grief online: privacy and anonymity; researcher lurking; language choice and changes; topical sensitivity; emotional impact on researchers; and researchers responsibilities and obligation. Each of these topic are important to understand and set the guidelines for now and in the future as social media and blogs/ online articles are becoming the way to communicate not only in your own country, but around the world.

This article explores the difference between self-disclosure in Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) and Face to Face Communication (FTF). More specifically, this article focuses Joseph Walther’s Hyperpersonal Model from 1996, and presents an attributional extension on the model. The article begins by discussing the presence of self-disclosure on the internet, stating that “self-disclosure is rife in profiles for online dating” and that “the average Facebook user discloses approximately 25% of the standard information that could be disclosed”. The article states that while there has been lots of research articles on the reasons that self-disclosure is so prevalent in CMC, such as anonymity and selective-self presentation, they all seem to make the assumption that increased self-disclosure in CMC directly results in increased intimacy. Hence, while research has shown that people disclose more information in CMC relative to FTF, no one has empirically proven the impact of self-disclosure on intimacy in CMC.

The purpose of this paper was to identify a possible correlation between the use of machine mediated communication (MMC) as a dependent variable and both verbal communication apprehension (CA) and interpersonal intimacy and closeness as independent variables. Viewed through the lens of three primary theoretical perspectives, social penetration theory, social information processing, and uncertainty reduction, two questions formed the foundation of the project. RQ1) Does the use of machine mediated communication, increased individual verbal communication apprehension and RQ2) Are hyper-reliant MMC users predisposed to avoid or minimize “the exchange of social messages and [the] subsequent relational growth” that effects intimacy within interpersonal

“When we’re looking at the screen we’re not face-to-face with someone who can immediately respond to us, so it’s easier to let it all out—it’s almost like we’re invisible,” said Belk, of the so-called “disinhibition effect” that online sharing helps create. “The irony is that rather than just one person, there’s potentially thousands or hundreds of thousands of people receiving what we put out there.” As for the consequences of these actions, Belk writes: “The resulting disinhibition leads many to conclude that they are able to express their “true self” better online than they ever could in face-to-face contexts. This does not mean that there is a fixed “true self” or that the self is anything other than a work in progress, but apparently self-revelation can be therapeutic, at least with the aid of self-reflexive applications.”

Everyday throughout our lives we interact with many different people. Naturally we develop relationships with these individuals and whether they become acquaintances or intimate friends this people all have some kind of impact on our lives. This cycle of developing, cultivating, and sustaining or ending these relationships continues everyday for our entire lives, and as a result many different theories have been developed to describe just how a complete stranger can become a lifelong friend. One in particular, Iwrin Altman and Dalmas Taylor’s social penetration theory, states that “the idea that relationships become more intimate over time when partners disclose more and more information about themselves.” This break down of the complex process that we go through every day of our lives definitely rings true in a large part of interpersonal communication. However, it is not without flaws. In this paper I will attempt to further explain Altman and Taylor 's theory, share some research supporting it, while also providing a critique of their work.

“Never put too much information online. You never know who will try to take advantage of it.” I must admit, my father’s word of advice sounds like a broken record repeating itself; expressing this to me so many times. Even though he is right. What I mean to say is that the advancement with Social Media over the years has been slowly (but surely) affecting us in real life. Considering the fact that companies and everyday people assess you based on your social media profile and online history. In essence, this violates the right of privacy as well as inhibiting the need of intimacy with other people; prompting me to explore what I had disclosed publicly via Google and Facebook. Have I shared too much information? Will it affect me with future opportunities? The only thing I can do is keep my fingers crossed, and hope for the best.

The questions this paper will research are societal issues concerned with deception and self-presentation. 1) How can the Internet facilitate deception through the manipulation of identity; 2) how are lies produced; do they differ in Internet conversations used to form intimate relationships? Do different media vehicles cause more intentional forms of lying; 3) is there a way to detect digital deception in different online communication spaces? In which situation is it more difficult to detect lies in a text-based or face-to-face interaction? What factors affect our ability to determine these deceptions?

Online relationships and communication has been an area of interest to myself ever since my family was able to get onto the web. My first experience in trying to create online relationships was your typical online dating situation, yet despite my efforts I could not quite make a friendship let alone a romantic relationship. While I was having trouble in making online connections on the other side of the septum a friend of my whom I will call Daisy had created a whole circle of friends through a gaming community. How was it that despite having similar strength and weakness in the way Daisy and I communicated, we both had very different outcomes when forming relationships online? Despite social penetration theory not specifically considering the realms of online communication, it can still be interpreted and used to analyze developing closeness in online communication.

Communicating through technology has become a necessity around the world. Text messaging, emailing, facetiming, and talking on the phone are different ways people use devices for communication. Technology has helped shy individuals pursue more friendships leading to more communication. “With self-disclosure facilitating relationship closeness, this theory also posits that online communications lead to closer, high quality friendships among adolescents” (Spies Shapiro and Margolin 3). New ways of communication due to technology have aided shy individuals into entering the world more smoothly. Psychologists, Lauren A. Spies Shapiro and Gayla Margolin note that, “adolescents who are uncomfortable interacting with peers

On the Internet, introverted users can be more outgoing, confident, and sociable because the lack of non-verbal cues, control over personal information disclosed, and ability to process conversation in slower than real-time provides increased control over one’s self-presentation, making social interaction less overwhelming (Bargh & McKenna, 2004; Eysenck, 1954; Eysenck, 1967; Turkle, 2011; Zhao, Grasmuck, & Martin, 2008). Maldonado, Mora, Garcia, and Edipo (2001) found that introverts sent computer-mediated messages with an extroverted tone and these messages contained more information than those sent by extroverted individuals. The Internet offers introverts the opportunity to express their true self in a more controlled environment where

The online world is often referred to as a virtual stage, a theatre. This is why it is believed that, “social media surely change[s] identity performance” (Jurgenson). Opening and being active on multiple accounts is like putting together a whole showcase with each account being a separate performance. Those of us who are connected to the online world are, “aware of being an object in others’ eyes” (Jurgenson). Because people know that they are always being watched, they are predictable; their online behavior is scripted in the way that they might either want to look their absolute best in front of the world’s eyes or they might hide certain aspects of their lives. This paranoia is said to, “provide a very real disconnection from the real”

Anonymity is a powerful resource for web-users everywhere. It is how content creators learn to make top quality content. It can be a way to confess your feelings for someone-without actually telling them. You can share secrets and not be ashamed. When it is used as a platform of limitless self-expression – it is truly a good thing. The internet is home for many of us. Just about every single American person accesses the internet in some form. One of the largest uses is social media. Social media is where people use the factor of anonymity to express themselves.

Pain. A feeling that most of us hate even to experience in life. It is an essential component that we feel when we get hurt physically or mentally. The more we experience it, the more we grow stronger in future. Physical pain is what we feel outside; it is temporary and we learn from it, but what happens when that pain is caused in your heart? What happens when that pain takes the form of grief? What happens when that pain breaks you into a million pieces like a shattered mirror? Perhaps, this pain can not be expressed in proper words. There are perhaps no proper words to describe this pain, at least none used on this planet. This intolerable pain which tears you apart becomes so overwhelming and unbearable that it taints your entire life. But grief—grief doesn’t run to my schedule, it has an agenda of its own, like a desire which doesn’t go with the way. Some say it comes in waves, but that would suggest a rhythm one can predict, like the rising and falling of tides. I feel no rhythm in my grief, but I do live in a slow-motion pace inside a bubble from which I see my altered world.