Throughout my years of experience on the Internet, there is one activity that I see systematically leading some towards Problematic Internet Use (PIU). Most Internet users have engaged in this activity themselves and have sometimes noticed that it takes up much more of their time than they believe it should. I am speaking about instant messaging, chatting on AOL or AIM, a common activity that has spread in popularity over the years. Users have the ability to chat with their friends in synchronous communication at any time. Everyone can identify with the situation of chatting online when you are supposed to be researching something or completing a homework assignment. All of a sudden it is 2 o’clock in the morning and you either complete the task haphazardly or don’t do it at all. Instant message programs are a perfect place for vulnerable individuals to begin to experience PIU.
The synchronous psychological space of instant message programs is very conducive to PIU. To begin with, users with an internal locus of control will be very attracted to IM. People with an internal locus of control are defined as, “People who felt their own actions were effectual and had a great deal to do with how events came out” (Wallace, 173). With the ability to carefully construct messages and control what information is supplied to others, they have more control over their circumstances, therefore increasing their attraction to IM. Attraction will be furthered through operant conditioning. Having someone IM you is a reward. When someone signs online, they do not know when they will IM’ed or by who. It is this variable schedule of rewards that keeps them attracted, especially in this synchronous space where they can come at any time and in any number. The maintenance of virtual presence factor also comes into play in instant messaging. Users feel as if they have to maintain their online community and avoid missing out on things when not online. This will further their attraction and keep them online longer. Finally, Newbie Disease also has its effect. Most of us were on AOL or AIM constantly when it first came out and have since reduced the amount of time that we spend on IM. Even though this is so, many people who have had a lot of experience with IM continue to overuse it.
Caplan’s Model definitely applies to instant messaging. Many people would be identified as displaying excessive use of IM, exceeding normal or planned time online. Some, however, experience compulsive use, unable to control themselves from chatting on AIM and feeling guilty about it. As far as psychosocial factors are concerned, individuals with psychosocial problems would find Instant Messaging very attractive. Due to their negative perceptions about their social competence, they would find Instant Messaging to be a more comfortable means of communication due to its anonymity and reduced responsibility, subsequently lessening the threat to them. This preference for online interaction through instance messaging would most likely lead to the excessive and compulsive use outcome that Caplan points to, proving to further exacerbate their psychosocial problems as the cycle begins again. Although causation cannot be claimed, Instant Messaging and its synchronous communication capabilities do appear to promote PIU in vulnerable individuals.
I commented on:
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/11/facebook-gift-and-curse.html
1 comment:
You speak of positive reinforcement but what about the equally strong (potentially stronger) effect of punishment? Every time you IM someone you believe that they will IM you back. But what about when they don't? Their away message isn't up, their screenname is not idle...you feel ostracized, a highly negative feeling of being "left out." This can be considered punishment for IMing someone, this would lead to reduction in the behavior, in this case--IMing.
Post a Comment