Team+3+(2011SP)

= ﻿﻿﻿﻿﻿﻿ ﻿Self Disclosure Through Social Networking =

﻿Self-disclosure is any information about the self that a person communicates to another. In the context of online self-disclosure involves communicating personal information about the self via contribuations to a website. Social networking environments (e.g MySpace, Facebook, Twitter) provide a combination of tools that help users create various forms of content, many of which involve self-disclosure (Pike, Jacqueline; Bateman,Patrick; Butler, Brian). How is electronically mediated interpersonal communication different from live, face-to-face conversations? There are six key differences, which have to do with (1) time, (2) varying degrees of anonymity, (3) potential for deception, (4) nonverbal cues, (5) role of the written word, and (6) distance (Beebe). 



﻿History behind Social Networking
Georg Simmel, writing at the turn of the twentieth century, was the first scholar to think directly in social network terms. His essays pointed to the nature of network size on interaction and to the likelihood of interaction in ramified, loosely-knit networks rather than groups (Simmel, 1908/1971). After a hiatus in the first decades of the twentieth century, three main traditions in social networks appeared. In the 1930s, J.L Moreno pioneered the systematic recording and analysis of social interaction in small groups, especially classrooms and work groups (sociometry), while a Harvard group led by W. Lloyd Warner and Elton Mayo explored interpersonal relations at work. In 1940, A.R. Radcliffe-Brown's presidential address to British anthropologists urged the systematic study of networks. However, it took about 15 years before this call was followed-up systematically. Social network analysis developed with the kinship studies of Elizabeth Bott in England in the 1950s and the 1950s–1960s urbanization studies of the University of Manchester group of anthropologist (centered around Max Gluckman and later J. Clyde Mitchell) investigating community networks in southern Africa, India and the United Kingdom. Concomitantly, British anthropologist S. F. Nadel codified a theory of social structure that was influential in later network analysis (Linton).

Privacy vs. Disclosure
The privacy management theory, previously known as the communication boundary management theory, posts that individuals balance their need for privacy and their need for disclosure. When deciding to share personal information individuals erect psychological boundaries between what they are willing to disclose to others and what they are not. These boundaries involve dimensions of: information ownership, individuals believe that they own their information; control, or who has restricted information; and permeability, in that they allow certain types of information to flow through. Individuals construct these boundaries because self-disclosure is perceived as risky and may result in vulnerability or loss of face (Pike, Jacqueline; Bateman,Patrick; Butler, Brian).  



﻿**Electronically Mediated Communication vs. Face-to-face Communication**
Electronically mediated communication (EMC) makes it easier to control what information people learn about us. This is because you have more control over what side of yourself you show others. Our self- disclosure through social networking can range from who we are talking to, what kind of mood we are in, what we are trying to gain from communicating with that specific person and what we feel we might have to lose after exposing our true selves. Of course, everyone wants to be liked, so most of us find it easier to self-disclose through social networking. We have more time to respond to others, which means we have more time to revise our thoughts. There is always the option to "delete" our thoughts before we voice them and embarass ourselves. On sites such as Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter we can change our privacy settings to show more or less about ourselves at any given time. When you're engaging in a face to face interaction with someone, you don't have that same "delete" option. Once you have said something there is no possible way to take it back and erase it from the other person's mind. Like the Russian proverb says, "once a word goes out of your mouth, you can never swallow it again." According to experts James McCroskey and Virginia Richmond communication apprehension, is "the fear or anxiety associated with either real or anticipated communication with another person or persons." One study found that up to 80 percent of the population experiences some degree of nervousness or apprehension when they speak in public (Beebe). This further reinforces why many more people are reaching out through social networking.

 A key difference between face-to-face and computer-mediated communication is the rate at which information reaches you. During an in-person conversation, you process a lot of information quickly; you process the words you hear as well as the many nonverbal cues you see (facial expression, gestures, and body posture) and hear (tone of voice and the use of pauses). During text-only interactions, there is less information to process (no audio cues or visual nonverbal cues), so it takes a bit longer for the relationship to develop- but it does develop as you learn more about your partner's likes, dislikes, and feelings. Theorist have develped the cues-filtered-out theory and the media richness theory. The cues-filtered-out theory suggest that emotional expression is severely restricted when we communicate using only text messages; nonverbal cues such as facial expression, gestures, and tone of voice are filtered out. Because of the lack of nonverbal cues and other social information, we'll be less likely to use EMC to manage relationships because of its limited ability to carry emotional and relational information. Although Facebook and Myspace present photos and ample personal information, communication through those forums is still not as rich as an face-to-face converation. The media richness theory suggest that the richness of a communication channel is based on four criteria: (1) the amount of feedback that the communicator can receive, (2) the number of cues that the channel can convey and that can be interpreted by a receiver, (3) the variety of language that a communicator uses, and (4) the potential for expressing emotions and feelings. Using these four criteria, researchers have developed a continuum of communication channels, from communication-rich to communiction-lean. There is some evidence that those wishing to communicate a negative message, such as a message ending a relationship, may select a less rich communication medim-they may be more likely to send a letter or an e-mail rather than sharing the bad news face-to-face. Similarly, people usually want to share good news in person, when they can enjoy the positive reaction to the message. Both the cues-filtered-out theory and media richness theory suggest that the restriction of nonverbal cues, which provide information about the nature of the relationship between communicators, hampers the quality of the relationships that can be established using EMC. But a newer perspective suggests that although EMC may communicate fewer relational cues, eventually we are able to discern relational information (Beebe).

media type="youtube" key="SmxZKLcQhRk" height="429" width="528" align="center"

**Are We Disclosing Our True Self, Or Somebody We Want To Be?**
Like a good mystery, social networking parallels a good mystery. It begins with an interest and wonderment much as we do at the shoe store. We’ll just take a look in the shoe department and see what is out there these days. We just want to take a little look at all the styles and colors, right? Nope, they call for our attention to look at them a little deeper, maybe even pick the shoes up and inspect them closer, and maybe, just maybe we’ll try them on and see how they feel.



<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Though people are not shoes, we tend to be somewhat selective when we network. Unique as we all are, some people are found more interesting than others, some people are more witty than others, and we often gravitate to those that may possess a more "appealing" appearance. If Brad Pitt, Vanessa Williams, Drew Carey, and Amy Winehouse were all in a room, the chances are we would migrate toward Brad Pitt or Vanessa Williams. But what if Drew Carey and Amy Winehouse were much more interesting and rhetorically captivating? Which direction would we honestly take?

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Authors Steven A. Beebe, Susan J. Beebe, and Mark V. Redmond of "Interpersonal Communication - Relating to Others" identifies how self-concept and self-esteem contribute to ways of how we respond to others. A perfect example is how we perceive ourself influences our behavior; or the image of ourself influences our response. If we are having a great day, our clothes fit perfectly, the hair is on target, would this be the perfect time to network? Obviously our interpretation of how we look is on the high end and chances are we will secure some interest from //another// interesting person or group. With this opportunity present and our current image of ourself quite positive, more than likely we are going to focus on Brad and Vanessa and engage in some sort of small talk to get the party started. With Lady Luck on our side, the grandest of opportunity exists where we can be someone that Brad and Vanessa would want to socialize with.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">**I Am Interesting, You Want to Socialize With Me, and Here's What I've Got to Say**
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;"> <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Professor **Susan Krauss Whitbourne**, Ph.D of the University of Massachusettes lists four reasons people go bad, cheat, or lie: Why People Lie
 * 1) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Reinforcement
 * 2) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Memory Distortions
 * 3) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Protection of Positive Sense of Identity
 * 4) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Self-serving Biases

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">It's easy to blame our "other identity" on the excuse that "everyone does it." True enough, many people do. The problem flourishes when we have developed a persona or an identity that is suited for specific situations. So if the shoes for church end up going to a club, we have just committed a social error and we have to create a diversion so it goes un-noticed. And we begin the journey of who we want to be. The "seed" has planted of phase one, reinforcement.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;"> Memory distortions are just that: distortions. We begin to build on what was a (innocent?) little fib. Repeating will eventually move this distortion, aka little fib, into our long-term memory and //become p//art of our memory. As Dr. Susan Whitbourne continued in her reasons, these distortions begin to build upon each other and continue to grow and grow. So now you have Brad and Vanessa eating out of your hands. You've proven your worth as being interesting, but fabricated, fascinating individual and now you have to maintain this other identity. There is no denying the fact you will be questioned and have to provide details about yourself. Your challenge is how to remember this other person you created? Simple enough, reason 4: Protection of Positive Sense of Identity.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">Can't remember who you are? Can't remember what you said? When questioned, a solution is to twist the facts around, or blame someone else known as "projection." In these cases it has just solidified more in your created memory and a close-call has been diverted. You can move on and deny you have told another fib. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: 0px; overflow: hidden;"> <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">When we fabricate our true self, it opens a cornucopia of opportunities. We can be a retired lawyer, a freelance artist, an aspiring actor, anything and everything we want to be. Managing, we have learned from Dr. Whitbourne, isn't actually easy, but with an arsenal of excuses, projections, and other creative (and self-satisfying explanations), we are who we want to be, who t//hey// want us to be and everyone is happy; until we set guidelines to evaluate ourself, and another set of guidelines to evaluate others. At this level of the game we have become morally defective - a person none of us would want to socially network with - yet we are one. Ultimately, we have denied ourself any fulfillment from these behaviors; and worse could be a reputation that precedes us where everyone practices complete avoidance.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">Karen Horney was a pioneering theorist in psychoanalysis. Her career began at the Institute for Psychoanalysis in Berlin and eventually led her to hold Associate Director of the Chicago Institute for Psychoanalysis. She also founded the American Journal of Psychoanalysis. Horney named ten particular patterns of neurotic needs. They are based on things that all humans need, but that are distorted in some because of difficulties within their lives. So maybe a little fabrication is deeply rooted due to something in our lives? If so, we still continue to deny our true self when we socially network.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">Horney identified ten particular patterns of neurotic needs and further clumped them into three categories. The second coping category is a direct hit on why we may "do what we do" when we disclose:

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">//The second broad coping strategy is aggression, also called the moving-against and the expansive solution. Here, children's first reaction to parental indifference is anger, or basic hostility. Needs four through eight fall under this category. __The fourth need is for power, for control over others, and for a facade of omnipotence. Fifth is the neurotic need to exploit others and to get the better of them. Another need is for social recognition and prestige, with the need for personal admiration falling along the same lines. The eighth neurotic need is for personal achievement.__//

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">If this really is the case, how much creedence can we put into another's claim? Chances are not only have we fabricated ourself, but who or the group we've created this person for may have actually created their own facade also. There is no way to know for sure, but if Horney is correct, then we have an extremely high probability that our fabricated self is networking with other fabricated selves.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">So now that Brad and Vanessa think we are the bomb, should we entertain the thought of Horney's theory and toss Brad and Vanessa aside.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">Someone We want to Disclose: Our True Self
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;"> <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;"> <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">The room filled with fascinating people including Brad Pitt, Vanessa Williams, and the not-so-appealing Drew Carey and Amy Winehouse proves to be challenging. Not to say that Brad and Vanessa are not interesting or worth socializing with, but in being true to yourself and being truth**//FUL//**, your odds of a successful disclosure with someone of the same caliper have better odds. Whether we are self disclosing online or face-to-face, it just makes more sense to be our "true" self. After all, we can't expect to ever build an honest relationship with anyone if we start it off with lies, no matter how big or small they might be.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">There are numerous self-help books, self-help on-line discussions, and a wealth of information through any media that can provide instructions and recommendations on how being true to ourself is being true to others. The biggest challenge is realizing that an honest, straight forward interpretation of ourself will lead to a much more fulfilling response in social networking. It's not that we don't have anything to offer, it may be we are inefficient of how to present ourself and embelish on our values without sounding self-righteous or even egotistical.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">A blog a few years ago, "Discover Your True Self", lists some very crucial points in developing an honest opinion of ourself. One of the most hard-hitting and of high importance is respecting your goals and values. The blog by Gleb Reyes descbries this target:

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">//"This is probably the most important aspect of staying in peace with yourself. If you don’t respect what’s important for you in long term, you’re putting yourself under a risk of becoming a slave to other situations and people who will manipulate you.Yes, it’s always good for you to give value to others, but you should avoid doing it at your own goals and values expense. If you know that helping someone else make things worse from your own goals and values point of view, take some time and reconsider. In many cases, the little value you’re going to force yourself to give to someone else will not be worth the personal goals of yours which you may not meet as the result."// <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">We have to first respect ourself. To achieve any success in self-disclosure in any form of social networking is taking ourself serious; and that is the realization we all have worth. Maybe we are not a lawyer or a promiment business person, but the fact is we are somebody and we are someone. A positive and honest approach will reward us ten-fold rather than a little fib here and there. For those who choose to disclose a person they //think// they are or want to be end up being socially deprived in the long run. Like the old saying: "What goes around, comes around."

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">So Amy isn't the most appeaaling of characters, but there is no denying she is interesting at certain levels. Stereotyping people based on looks will deny you many opportunities, and networking with the "selected" ones will probably make you bored and the question "Are they really who they say they are?"

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">**Be Who You Are and You'll Know Yourself Better**
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">Self disclosure in social networking needs to be honest. And that means those on the social network need to be honest with theirself first before they can proceed further. We don't need to be in that group, we need to be the stand-out, the interesting one, and how we achieve that status is looking at ourself very objectively and honestly. We realize now just how much we have to offer. Once we have successfully come to terms with our own reality, and that reality is positive, understanding, honest and truthful - not to mention someone people will migrate to - we can begin a very successul networking experience. When others see us with self respect, our chances of networking with those who are not who they say they are start to diminish. Our networking opportunities will be endless and satisfying.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Our Online Profile
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">The requirements for internet social sites are pretty simple and make it easy to create a profile. Even when creating the internet profile you can use fake names, e-mails, and even fake pictures to set up the account. There is no real way to make sure that people are who they say they are on the internet. It has been found that people are more likely to misrepresent themselves in cyberspace than in a real-space relationships. In other words, people are more likely to change things about themselves to attract a specific group of people. For this reason people tend to use fake names, ages, physical attributes, and accomplishments. The difference between our “online self” and our “offline self” is measured by what our goal is to accomplish while on the internet social site. Is it to let people see who we really are or who we want to be?

== <span style="display: block; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-align: center;">** ﻿ Gaming On Social Networks Encourages Other Oriented Behavior **  ==

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin-bottom: 0in;">There is evidence that social networking plays a part in being other oriented. One social networking site, Facebook, encourages online gaming with a twist. The games, like Farmville and Frontierville, encourage players to 'gift' objects to each other. Items needed may be paint buckets to complete a building, or leashes for the virtual dog to complete a gaming mission. One can post what they need for their particular game, and a friend on their list can then choose to send the gift or not. The disclosure in this situation is not verbal, it is implied. 'I am a good friend because I give you what you need.' Players build trust with each other by gifting, and often from that basic transaction, actually begin to disclose by adding notes to the gift request. Players may add, 'Just need one more of these please, thanks!' Then a reply may come in a 'like', meaning the a particular person responded to the gift request. The message is clear: 'I gave you what you need. You can trust me.' <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin-bottom: 0in;">Some items needed to progress in these social networking games can only be gifted to you from friends. They cannot be purchased with the monetary units inside the game, or even with a payment to the site. This encourages gaining more friends who play the game, and eventually promotes self disclosure in the social network. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin-bottom: 0in;">Being other-oriented involves a conscious effort to consider the world from the point of view of those with whom you interact(Beebe). The silent exchange in Farmville takes only a few minutes. The end result is that one has put someone else before themselves. People who may simply be friends of friends have the opportunity to build trust and friendships that evolve into actual self disclosure relationships.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: 0px; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; overflow: hidden;">

<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">As more and more students turn to websites such as Facebook and MySpace to chronicle their lives and socialize with friends, they also are learning that their words and pictures are reaching way beyond the peers for whom they were intended (Lim). And some are paying a price. It’s hard to image losing your job, your spot on the basketball/football team, your position on the student paper over something you’ve posted on Facebook, MySpace, Twitter or YouTube. But these incidents are becoming more common as time goes on. What you post online is a representation of who you are and what you believe in. This can be considered as too much for public knowledge. Your boss may feel that what you’re posting will have a negative effect on the business, which is a risk he/she is probably not willing to take. While social networking is a way to express ourselves we need to keep in mind it’s possible for anyone to read what we post online. We should probably ask ourselves before making a post, is this something that would be appropriate for my parents, professors or pastor to read? <span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">Besides the fact that what we post online could cost us our job, our degree at the college of our choice, or our spot on the basketball team could it cost us our life too? The video below will really get you to thinking about that. We are constantly posting what location we’re at with whom, e-mail address, phone number, physical address, sexual orientation, relationship status, places of interest where we regularly visit, when we’re going out of town, where we work, etc. We post all this information without giving it a second thought. But the fact is this can ultimately be very dangerous.

media type="youtube" key="22mRAx1fYkU" height="454" width="620" align="center"

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">**﻿﻿How Self-Disclosure through Social Networks Impacts Interpersonal Communication/Relationships**
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: 0px; overflow: hidden;"> <span style="color: black; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">Self-disclosure is part of human nature and plays an important role in the process of building and maintaining interpersonal relationships. A lot of the impressions and judgments we make about others are based on their self-disclosure. Parks and Floyd inform us that relationships develop on an interpersonal level through the following dimensions: “an increase in interdependence, breadth and depth of the interaction, a shared communicative code change (specialized ways of communicating), an interpersonal predictability and understanding, and a continued relationship into the future” (Parks and Floyd, 1996). <span style="color: black; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">Various researches have proven that college students use Facebook as a means of forming new friendships/relationships, maintain the ones they already have, and as a provider of “something to do” when they’re bored. Social networks such as Facebook give the option for people to develop both acquaintances and close relationships. Therefore, social networks have become a large venue through which just about anyone can socialize and form relationships, the same way an atmosphere filled with a variety of people would (Boyd, 2008). <span style="color: black; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">One interesting aspect of establishing relationships through social networks is whether these types of relationships can be considered strong, quality relationships. Some studies have shown that the characteristics of online interaction, such as being able to remain anonymous and not have to communicate face-to-face, make bonding easier. On the flip side, others say that face-to-face communication is considered to be a more meaningful way of interacting. It can be concluded that when all parties involved have common interests and are willing to establish relationships with others via social networks, then the results are positive. <span style="color: black; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">As Walther explains, “Social Information Processing Theory has been developed to explain how people develop and maintain relationships in a computer-mediated environment (SIPT; Walther, 1992).” This theory says that relationships that are established over the net can be just as good, if not better, than relationships that are created in person (Walther, 2008). While communication that is done through online social networks does not include features like being able to see the person, be near them, and exchange words more frequently, the uncertainty about the other person that arises in interaction still exists online. When it comes to “relational development”, the above mentioned characteristics do assist but are not a determining factor in developing relationships, or minimizing the uncertainty that is a part of it. When there are no “nonverbal cues, communicators adapt their relationship behaviors to the remaining cues available in CMC, such as content and linguistic strategies, as well as chronemic and typographic cues (Walther & Tidwell, 1995). While there are pros and cons to initiating and maintaining an interpersonal relationship through social networks, “many Facebook relationships are already existing face-to-face relationships and self-disclosure has already occurred.” This leads us to assume that a high level of interaction predictability would occur. (Park, Jin and Jin, 2009). <span style="color: black; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">In the discussion of what personality type gets the most out of relationships over social networks, Sheldon explains: <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">// The Social Compensation or “Poor-Get-Richer” Hypothesis suggests that those who have poor social networks and social anxiety can get more benefit by disclosing themselves freely and creating new relationships through the Internet. Internet benefits introverts more than extraverts (McKenna & Bargh, 2000). That is, new relationships and interactions online may compensate for the social capital that these people lack in the offline world. Studies showed that the Internet’s anonymity and reduced cues might stimulate online self-disclosure because thereis no fear of being ridiculed or rejected (Derlega, Metts, & Petronio, 1993; Pennebaker, 1989). Sheldon and Honeycutt (2008) found that students who are afraid of face-to-face meetings are more likely to go on Facebook to pass time when bored or to occupy their time. On Facebook they can interact with others without looking at each other’s face. This may be particularly appealing to introverts when trying to open up //(I'll Poke You. You'll Poke Me!" Self-disclosure, Social Attraction, Predictability and Trust as Important Predictors of Facebook Relationships."). <span style="color: black; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">Kraut, Kiesler, Boneva, Cummings, Helgeson, & Crawford use the “Rich-Get-Richer” theory to debate that extraverted people are the ones who are more likely to self-disclose and communicate, therefore, they benefit from the possibilities of making new friends through social networks more than introverts (Kraut, Kiesler, Boneva, Cummings, Helgeson, & Crawford, 2002). Despite, the difference of opinions, what it boils down to is that social networks like Facebook are used for numerous reasons for all kinds of people, not for shy or reserved people with face-to-face communication difficulties more than extroverted people, and vice-versa. Facebook interaction is basically an assimilation of real, in-person communications.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">We are more likely to discuss our emotions in an interpersonal relationship than in an impersonal relationship. Research supports our common intuition: We are more likely to talk about our personal feelings with people we know, care about, and feel a unique relationship with (friends, lovers, and family members) than with people we don't know or don't particularly care about (Beebe, 2011).

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin-bottom: 0in;">Social networking plays a large role in self esteem as well. Facebook and social networks like it allow people with low self esteem to gain friends when they otherwise may not. For shy or introverted people, social networking is an outlet that can help them become more confident and outgoing. The Self Awareness theory suggests that people view themselves as both a subject and an object. When viewing oneself as an object, we reflect on our consciousness. Thinking of the self, we become the object of our thoughts, and can think of ourselves positively or negatively. If we view the self as a subject, we experience events such as going to school or eating breakfast. “Research suggests that when we are in this state of "objective self-awareness," we have a tendency to have a downgraded rating of the self. The reason for the drop is that when we are self-aware, we tend to make comparisons to social standards and often can feel we fall short of these standards.” Social networks, however, constantly reaffirm that we are well within the standards. As we gain each new friend, and with each communication with them, our self esteem is raised a little more. We find we are just like everyone else in that we are all different, and it is socially acceptable to be different. The result is that we become more outgoing and more confident in who we are. We learn to communicate more and more when we get the positive feedback. Social networks like Facebook can have a positive impact on our lives by improving the way we see ourselves.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">The way that people interact on social internet sites can also have a negative impact on a person’s self-esteem. On most of these internet social sites you can put comments on pictures or status updates. Mostly these are used in positive ways and help people feel accepted in their community of friends. Having the ability to post positive comments or updates also makes room for people to post negative comments which can definitely lower a person’s self esteem.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">**Stereotyping Others Online**
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">There was a belief that with the use of (EMC) electronically mediated communication that there were very little non-verbal cues. That has now changed with the social information processing theory that says there are subtle emotions cues called emoticons hidden in messages and the way we respond to them electronically. It seems that people are stereotyped by the way they look on internet site which can be negative or positive depending on the response. People also perceive messages depending on how long it took to respond, whether or not you used capital letters or what you say in the message. The social information processing theory also suggest that we can communicate relational and emotional messages via the Internet. But it may take longer to express messages that are typically communicated with facial expressions and tone of voice. == <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">**﻿Self Disclosure Through Social Networking Escalates** <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">  == <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin-bottom: 0in;">The Johari Window model was created by Joseph Luft and Harry Ingham as a psychological tool that summarizes how self-awareness is influenced by self disclosure and information about yourself from others. There are four windows in the model. The first is the 'open' area. This is the area of information that is known to self and others. This area will likely contain impersonal information such as the color of your eyes, where you work, or what kind of car you drive. The more information one reveals about themselves, the larger this window will be. The second area is for information other people know about you, but you are not yet aware. It could contain things like gestures you make unconsciously or the quirks someone may have but be unaware of. As a person learns more about how others see them, this window gets smaller. The third portion of the model is for hidden information. The information that no one but you knows is contained here. This window gets smaller as one self discloses more information. Finally, the last window is for unknown information. This is for information that the self does not know, and no one else knows either, yet. This is information that you will obtain over your future. Ideas, thoughts and feelings, and discoveries that will occur in the future are stored here, until they are uncovered. This window always exists, and one can ever know how big it is because it is unknown.



<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin-bottom: 0in;">One reason why social networks are successful is that self disclosure escalates. On sites like Facebook and Twitter, people only release the information from the Johari Window that they know about themselves, and don't mind letting others know. When these tidbits of information are sent into the world and return with more information from other viewers, the intimacy of the relationship grows. As this happens, the 'open' area of the Johari Window grows as well. The reciprocal disclosure is a catalyst for more communication. The communication begins with impersonal information, and as the trust is built, the information disclosed gets more personal. The risk normally associated with social relationships is diminished on social networking sites because when you post something, you already know that everyone will see it. As people respond positively to your disclosure, and offer their own disclosure, the user is prompted again and again to share more. The relationships often progress quickly because the noise is minimal. The escalation of self disclosure pushes the user to get more, by giving more.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin-bottom: 0in;">No form of communication is simple. If any were, we would know how to reduce the number of misunderstandings and conflicts in our world. Because of variables involved in interpersonal exchanges, even simple requests are extremely complex. Life holds much uncertainty; there are many things we do not know. One of these purposes of communication, according to communication theorist, is to reduce our uncertainty. The process of sharing information and asking questions helps us reduce our uncertainty about what is happening at any given moment. Using social networking as our communication method makes this uncertainty less stressful and nerve racking. Communicating online seems to automatically give us a boost of self-confidence that we wouldn't normally have when communicating face-to-face. This boost of self-confidence helps us to self disclose more information about ourselves, possibly at a much faster rate than if we were face-to-face.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%; margin-bottom: 0in;">To be a competent interpersonal communicator is to be an other-oriented communicator-to focus on the needs, interests, values, and behaviors of others while being true to your own principles and ethical credo. This is true weather we are communicating through socail networking sites or face-to-face. Being other-oriented involves a conscious effort to consider the world from the point of view of those with whom you interact. This effort occurs almost automatically when you are communicating with those you like or who are similar to you. Thinking about the thoughts and feelings of those you dislike or who are different from you is more difficult and requires more effort and commitment. When we self disclose through social networking we are communicating with people whom we know well and with people whom we are just starting a relationship. With that being said it's important to be other-oriented know matter whom we are communicating with.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">**Overall, does network self-disclosure enhance your communication and add to a happier you?**

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">Being aware of the fact that we possess the need to share our thoughts, feelings, and experiences with others in order to establish relationships (intimate or not) leads us to question if being able to self-disclose, somewhat anonymously, through online social networks builds our confidence, boosts our communication, and makes us happier in our relationships?

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">As Dr. Shock states, self-dislcosure extends our social networks and increases our "social-capital" which, as a result, leads to a better sense of well-being. Studies based on this question have proven that being able to share your feelings over online social networks can help you gain greater social support and acceptance. This shows us that "

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">In conclusion of what setting we are more comfortable communicating in, Beebe, Beebe, and Redmond tell us that studies have proven that the "true self" is disclosed more often in online communication than face to face interaction. Research has also found that students that had more of an online communication with their friends felt more at ease self-disclosing than those who had more face-to-face communication with their friends. It appears as though it is easier to discuss "sensitive" topics and receive support from peers online. (Beebe, Beebe, Redmond, 2011)

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">Beebe, Beebe, and Redmond also inform that although disclosing our personal and negative information right away can backfire when trying to develop a relationship, some personal self-disclosure can boost attraction. Likewise, "an open display of attraction or liking for another person can result in a reciprocation of that attraction: We like those who like us." Once your relaionship has developed into more of an intimate one, opening up in your communication enhances the attraction factor. Furthermore, "self-disclosure has a positive impact on liking between strangers and an even greater impact in more developed relationships. In addition, our attraction to another person increases our tendency to self-disclose" (Beebe, Beebe, Redmond, 2011).

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">Dr. Shock's blog includes a response which is a great example of whether self-disclosing through social networks, such as blogs, makes you socially happier:

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 120%;">//Self-disclosure has helped me to gain great perspective, something that was definitely missing for me. Having other people’s support and advice through their comments on my blog has been fundamental in allowing myself to open up more in my day to day relationships. It has given me more confidence to voice my emotions when I am face to face with people now. I will say I have witnessed this form of self-disclosure get out of hand however, as bloggers become sensationalists in order to attract more attention to their blog and spark more controversial comments to their posts. Dangerous and damaging behaviour// (Self-disclosure in Blogging Makes You Befriended and Happy).



<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">**__Works ﻿Cited__**
<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Beebe, Steven A., Susan J. Beebe, and Mark V. Redmond. //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Interpersonal Communication //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">. Sixth ed. Pearson Education, 2011. Print.

Boyd, d. (2008). Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), //Youth, Identity, and Digital Media// (pp. 119 – 142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Dr. Shock. "Self-disclosure in Blogging Makes You Befriended and Happy." //Dr Shock MD PhD: A Neurostimulating Blog//. Web. 01 May 2011. <http://www.shockmd.com/2009/01/13/self-disclosure-in-blogging-makes-you-befriended-and-happy/>.

“Frontierville Snapshot”. Digital Image. Web. 6 Mar. 2010. http://blog.yvd.com

<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Horney, Karen. "Women's Intellectual Contributions to the Study of Ind and Society." //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Webster University //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">. Theory of Neurotic Needs. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/horney.html.

<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">" //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">The Johari Window" //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">. Photograph. Web. 19 Sept 2010. http://styxl.blogspot.com

<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Krauss, S. "Why Do Honest People Lie, Cheat and Make Excuses?" //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Psychology Today: Health, Help, Happiness Find a Therapist //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">. 18 May 2010. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.psychologytoday.com.

Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. //Journal of Social Issues, 58//, 49–74.

<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Lim, Kevin. "What You Say Can Haunt You." //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Theory.isthereason //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">. Academia, 10 Mar. 2006. Web. 01 May 2011. http://theory.isthereason.com.

Linton, Freeman. "History of social network analysis." 28 April. 2011. Web __http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_network#History_of_social_network_analysis__

Park, N., Jin, B., & Jin, S. (2009). //Motivations, impression management, and self-disclosure in social network sites//. Presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Chicago, IL.

Parks, M. R., & Floyd, K. (1996). Making friends in cyberspace. //Journal of Communication, 46//, 1-17. <span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; margin-bottom: 0in;">"Reverse Psychology." Cartoon. //Wikispaces//. Web. http://www.wikispaces.com.

<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%; margin-bottom: 0in;">Pike, Jacqueline; Bateman,Patrick; Butler, Brian. " I Didn’t Know You Could See That: The Effect of Social Networking Environment Characteristics on Publicness and Self-Disclosure." ** ﻿ ** Proceedings of the Fifteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, <span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%; margin-bottom: 0in;">

San Franciso, California, 6th-9th Aug. 2009. Web. http://www.katzis.org/wiki/images/e/ec/PikeBatemanButler2009.pdf <span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 110%; margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Reyes, Gleb. "Discover Your True Self." //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Personal Development Blog //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">. 2 June 2006. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.personaldevelopment.ie/2006/06/discover-your-true-self. <span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;"> <span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">"Self Disclosure Through Amateur Online Videos." //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">YouTube - Broadcast Yourself. //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;"> 21 Oct. 2008. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.youtube.com/.

<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Sheldon, Pavica. "I'll Poke You. You'll Poke Me!" Self-disclosure, Social Attraction, Predictability and Trust as Important Predictors of Facebook Relationships." //Cyberpsychology, Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace//. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.cyberpsychology.eu/view.php?cisloclanku=2009111101.

Tidwell, L. C., & Walther, J. B. (2002). Computer-mediated effects on disclosure, impressions, and interpersonal evaluations:

<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">"TMI Blufish Video." //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">YouTube - Broadcast Yourself. //<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;"> 11 June 2008. Web. 01 May 2011. http://www.youtube.com/. <span style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif;"> Walther, J.B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: a relational perspective. //Communication Research, 19//, 52–90.

Walther, J. B. (2008). The social information processing theory of computer-mediated communication. In L. Baxter & D. O. Braithwaite, (Eds.), //Engaging theories in interpersonal communication. Multiple perspectives// (pp. 391-404). London: Sage.

Getting to know one another a bit at a time. //Human Communication Research, 28//, 317-348.