Online Ways of Meeting People Are Better That Face-To-Face

The internet and its online virtual communities are a precipitously emerging way of communication. Within this assignment it will be discussed whether online ways of meeting people are better that face-to-face. Firstly the positive aspects and benefits to meeting people online rather than face-to-face will be discussed. This analysis will then be counter-balanced with the negative facets of encountering people in this way and finally it will be concluded with a summary of the evidence found.

It has long been an evolutionary argument that physical attraction is a major factor in forming relationships. Hence it is easy to recognise the difficulty Western society has in perceiving the idea of forming online relationships without visual attraction playing a role (Joinson, 2003). Nevertheless evolutionary psychologist David Buss has identified ten attributes that contribute to forming relationships, some of these were concerned with physical attractiveness, however over half were not related to visual appearance (Buss, 1998). Buss argued that the non-visual qualities such as: sympathy, politeness and humour can just as easily be expressed on-line as by face-to-face communication. This is supported by Cheng, Phil, Chan and Tong (2006) who identified that individuals found it easier to express intimacy on-line rather than face-to-face (Cheng, Phil, Chan & Tong, 2006).

One socio-psychological reason that individuals form on-line relationships is similarity. McKenna, Green and Gleason (2002) argue that people with similar interests and common identities tend to form long term relationships. This can be seen with the increase of in-group subject specific on-line forums and chat rooms (Joinson, 2003; McKenna et al 2002).

Moreover it is apparent within everyday social psychology with the formation of in-group and out-groups. According to Eysneck (2004) there is an overwhelming urge to conform to group norms. The global phenomenon Facebook takes meeting people and group formation to the next level. On Facebook groups and sub-groups are formed with individuals with similar interests (Ellison, Steinfield & Lampe, 2007). Ellison, Steinfield and Lampe in 2007 argued that both social capital and psychological well-being were greater by those who used Facebook regularly. They also believed bridging social capital was improved by Facebook by allowing different people from various socio-economic backgrounds to meet. However the research by Ishii and Ogasahara (2007) discovered that culture and environment plays a significant role in how individuals view meeting people online, social bonding and gratification (Ishii & Ogasahara, 2007). The study draws attention to the fact that the Japanese users preferred the technological virtual world, which reflects their cultural and environmental upbringing, whereas the Korean users favoured having real world personal relationship (Ishii & Ogasahara, 2007).

According to McKenna, Green and Gleason (2002) there are several other socio-psychological reasons why individuals find it easy to meet online. They believe that people can portray themselves as their 'true' self online, they argue this true self presentation can lead to the formation of committed friendships and relationships (McKenna et al 2002). Similarly Walther's study in 1996 had comparable findings, he stated that individuals can reveal and maximise their good points therefore minimising their weak points online, which he believed was a tactical way of self-presentation (Walther, 1996). McKenna, Green and Gleason's (2002) study also highlighted that individuals had a tendency for more intimate self-disclosure which in-turn leads to a reciprocal progression of disclosure, which set a precedent for heightened trust and intimacy. Furthermore Sproull and Kiesler's (1991) discovered that individuals were more likely to disclose personal information online than face to face or in written correspondence.

However Tice, Butler, Muraven and Stillwell in 1995 argue that online meeting can lead to higher levels of manipulated self representation. They believe this is more prevalent at the beginning of any relationship when individuals want to impress. Furthermore it is recognised that individuals could be taking their mental image of true self one stage further by portraying themselves in an idealised fashion (Tice et al, 1995). This is evident by the phenomenal increase of virtual world such as Second Life where individuals are tempted to....

Enter a world with infinite possibilities and live a life without boundaries, guided only by your imagination. Do what you love, with the people you love, from anywhere in the world. (Second Life, 2011, p.1).

Galanxhi and Nah's research in 2007 found that individuals who joined virtual worlds created perfect over exaggerated ideal self-representations or avatars that were far removed from their real world self which in itself can be classed as deception. Boon and Sinclair (2008) believe that Second Life encourages people to be deceitful as no option is given to use one's own name when creating an avatar therefore necessitating the need for deception (Boon & Sinclair, 2008). Although the majority of individuals in virtual communities do not purposely go online to hurt and deceive but purely to meet people in a virtual world, Harrison and Thomas (2009) believe that some individuals are fabricating their true identity in a way which could lead to harm of others.

In today's technological world there are many different online arenas for individuals to meet. Nevertheless according to Donath (1999) despite the ever increasing popularity of social networking and dating sites individuals can never realistically believe the information they are reading as identity has become very ambiguous. Deception is simple as individuals can set up false accounts and profiles with relative ease.

In online communication there is no reassurance of personality, personal attributes, verbal or non-verbal cues as there is in face-to-face communication. Traditionally social psychologists recognise the importance of body language and visual cues (Joinson, 2003). Riva (2002) identified that online