Cues Filtered Out
This is another theory that I am discussing based on its mention in Junghyun Kim’s 2003 article.
As Kim notes, this approach (Walther, Anderson, Park 1994) argues that the “[L]ack of Nonverbal cues in CMC makes it difficult (or at least more difficult) for people to interact with each other, as compared to FtF communication.” (Kim 6). However, this approach is problematic, since the meaning and influence of nonverbal cues are not clear and no research has been done to observe how much nonverbal cues contribute to FtF interpersonal communication. Exchanging many verbal and particularly non-verbal cues does not necessarily raise the intimacy or the clarity of a message if the cues are inaccurate, meaningless, or tangential.
“CMC also lacks social norms and standards, which leads users to be more aggressive and impulsive, and could lead to uninhibited behaviors. “(Sproull & Kiesler, 1991). An opposing perspective suggests that Lack of social context cues in CMC democratizes interpersonal relationships and enables people to express themselves more openly through anonymity and depersonalization. (Kim, 2000). This argument is greatly affected in consideration of the OVC, which essentially removes the anonymity factor and adds (back?) a level of personalization by reason of the participants seeing and hearing each other in a manner not unlike that of many FtF settings.