The Effect of Anticipated Future Interaction and Initial Impression Valence on Relational Communication in Computer-Mediated Interaction

Abstract

Prior research on social information processing theory (SIPT; Walther, 1992) has established the anticipation of future interaction (AFI) as a motivator of online relationship development (Walther, 1994). The present study tests the proposition that, although initial development may be the product of AFI, continued development occurs as a function of the valence of the impression formed in the initial interaction (Sunnafrank, 1986). An experiment with a 2 (AFI versus No AFI) × 2 (positive versus negative impression) × 2 (time) design was conducted to assess this proposition along five relational communication dimensions. Results from four of the tests revealed support for the prediction. The implications of the results for SIPT and the study of online relational communication are discussed.

Keywords:

• Computer-Mediated Communication
• Predicted Outcome Value Theory
• Relational Communication
• Social Information Processing Theory

The author wishes to thank Jim Query, William Benoit, and the anonymous reviewers who provided feedback on this manuscript as well as Jody Koenig Kellas for her comments on an earlier draft. An earlier version of this manuscript was presented at the 2005 annual meeting of the Western States Communication Association held in San Francisco, CA.

Notes

The topics were: (a) What do you like or dislike about your classes and major? (b) Discuss something from your past that you feel guilty about or would like to do over to correct/fix; (c) What type of job would you like to have? Why? (d) What are the funniest or oddest things that have ever happened to you? and (e) How would your male and female friends describe you? What are they like? Participants determined the order in which they were discussed and told to employ them as “discussion starters.” No significant effects emerged due to topic order (p > .30).

Time 2 tasks were distributed equally across all conditions. Preliminary analyses conducted on each dimension failed to reveal any significant differences attributable to the tasks (p > .20). Both tasks are available from the author upon request.

The sample responses are available from the author upon request.

Since the conceptual framework draws upon POV, participants were also asked to complete Sunnafrank's (1990) 10-item measure, which utilizes a 6-point scale (6 = much more positive than I expected), following the initial interaction. The results of an ANOVA conducted on the measure revealed results consistent with POV, F (1, 116) = 96.31, p < .001, η² = .45. Participants who interacted with confederates in the positive condition forecasted more favorable outcome values (M = 5.02, SD = 1.04) than did their counterparts (M = 2.89, SD = 1.42).An additional check conducted on the impression valence manipulation produced similar results. Two trained coders independently and blindly reviewed interaction transcripts and rated each confederate on the same item used by participants. The results indicated that confederates in the positive condition (M = 5.81, SD = 1.44) were perceived significantly more favorably than were those in the negative condition (M = 2.66, SD = 1.52), F (1, 116) = 135.80, p < .001, η² = .54.

This manuscript was accepted by the previous editor, Professor Jim L. Query.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Artemio Ramirez

Artemio Ramirez, Jr. (Ph.D., University of Arizona) is an Assistant Professor in the School of Communication at The Ohio State University.