Getting to know you: Face-to-face versus online interactions

被引：85

作者：

Okdie, Bradley M. ^{[1
]}

Guadagno, Rosanna E. ^{[1
]}

Bernieri, Frank J. ^{[2
]}

Geers, Andrew L. ^{[3
]}

Mclarney-Vesotski, Amber R. ^{[4
]}

机构：

[1] Univ Alabama, Dept Psychol, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487 USA

[2] Oregon State Univ, Dept Psychol, Corvallis, OR 97331 USA

[3] Univ Toledo, Dept Psychol, Toledo, OH 43606 USA

[4] Alpena Community Coll, Alpena, MI 49707 USA

来源：

COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR | 2011年 / 27卷 / 01期

关键词：

Computer-mediated communication; Person perception; Personality; Self-other agreement; Impression formation; COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATION; IMPRESSION-FORMATION; THIN SLICES; PERCEPTION; SELF; PERSONALITY; ACCURACY; INTERNET; PERSUASION; BEHAVIOR;

D O I：

10.1016/j.chb.2010.07.017

中图分类号：

B84 [心理学];

学科分类号：

04 ; 0402 ;

摘要：

It is an open question as to how impressions formed via computer-mediated communication (CMC) differ from those formed face-to-face (FtF). Some research suggests that judgments of others formed while interacting over CMC are more favorable than judgments formed in FtF, while other researchers argue the pattern is in the opposite direction. We sought to settle this conflict by examining impressions formed via each communication mode while controlling for the other. Participants interacted with a partner twice: once FtF and once CMC. When controlling for each communication mode, participants interacting FtF, formed more positive impressions of their partner than did those in the other sequence. Furthermore, FtF participants had greater self-other agreement then those who interacted via CMC. Implications for impressions formed over the Internet are discussed. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

引用

页码：153 / 159

页数：7

共 50 条

[21] Assessing Student Learning in Online Versus Face-to-Face Wellness Courses
Keefer, Daniel J.
RESEARCH QUARTERLY FOR EXERCISE AND SPORT, 2009, 80 (01) : A28 - A29
[22] Overcoming student resistance to group work: Online versus face-to-face
Smith, Glenn Gordon
Sorensen, Chris
Gump, Andrew
Heindel, Allen J.
Caris, Mieke
Martinez, Christopher D.
INTERNET AND HIGHER EDUCATION, 2011, 14 (02): : 121 - 128
[23] College Students' Multitasking Behavior in Online Versus Face-to-Face Courses
Lepp, Andrew
Barkley, Jacob E.
Karpinski, Aryn C.
Singh, Shweta
SAGE OPEN, 2019, 9 (01):
[24] Effect of Course Delivery on Physical Activity: Face-to-Face Versus Online
Foster, Chelsea S.
Nelson, Larry P.
Hargreaves, Jean Ann
Ray, Christopher T.
Buckwalter, John B.
RESEARCH QUARTERLY FOR EXERCISE AND SPORT, 2012, 83 : A44 - A44
[25] Undergraduate students' attitudes towards online versus face-to-face counseling
Cui, Lixia
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2008, 43 (3-4) : 267 - 267
[26] An online premium? Characteristics and performance of online versus face-to-face students in Principles of Microeconomics
Dendir, Seife
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR BUSINESS, 2016, 91 (02) : 59 - 68
[27] Are You Friendly or Just Polite? - Analysis of Smiles in Spontaneous Face-to-Face Interactions
Hoque, Mohammed
Morency, Louis-Philippe
Picard, Rosalind W.
AFFECTIVE COMPUTING AND INTELLIGENT INTERACTION, PT I, 2011, 6974 : 135 - +
[28] Getting to know you: The development of mechanisms underlying face learning
Matthews, Claire M.
Davis, Emily E.
Mondloch, Catherine J.
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL CHILD PSYCHOLOGY, 2018, 167 : 295 - 313
[29] Perceived performance in coworking spaces: the effect of face-to-face and online social interactions
Labrado-Antolin, Maribel
Delgado-Pina, Isabel
Fernandez-Menandez, Jose
Rodriguez-Ruiz, Oscar
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORGANIZATIONAL ANALYSIS, 2024,
[30] Friend Recommendation using Offline and Online Social Information for Face-to-Face Interactions
Kim, Kyungmin
Kim, Taehun
Hyun, Soon J.
2016 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SMART COMPUTING (SMARTCOMP), 2016, : 214 - 218

← 1 2 3 4 5 →