Week 3 - Chapter 5
Social Interaction and Everyday Life in the Age of the Internet
Study by Christine Miranda
Investigated iPod users' receptiveness in NYC subway.
Hypothesis: Musical distraction makes iPod users less approachable.
Observed iPod vs. non-iPod users' interactions.
Factors analyzed: positioning, body language, race, sex, age.
Recorded both verbal exchanges and nonverbal cues.
Findings:
iPod users not averse to providing information; appeared courteous.
Non-users perceived iPod users as less approachable (Civil inattention)
Users quickly returned to their music post-interaction.
Key Concepts in Impression Management
Impression Management:
Definition: Techniques to influence how others perceive us.
Influenced heavily by social roles.
Social Roles:
Expectations attached to different social positions (e.g., teacher).
Cues in Social Interactions:
Nonverbal communication crucial (body language, tone).
Civil Inattention: Quick acknowledgment of others without intrusiveness.
Theoretical Perspectives
Erving Goffman:
Social life seen as a performance on various stages.
Closed-off spaces provide security, reducing interactions.
Garfinkel’s Ethnomethodology:
Studies how individuals understand social interactions.
Investigates the unstated conventions that guide daily conversation.
Types of Interactions
Focused Interaction: Direct communication with attention.
Unfocused Interaction: Acknowledging presence without deep engagement.
Personal Space
Zones of Personal Space (Hall):
Intimate: <1.5 feet (close relationships).
Personal: 1.5 - 4 feet (friends and acquaintances).
Social: 4 - 12 feet (formal settings).
Public: >12 feet (performing to an audience).
Interactional Dynamics in Public Spaces
Interactional Vandalism: When social norms are violated in interactions (e.g., street harassment).
Negotiating Encounters: Understanding cues for conversation openings and closings is critical.
Contemporary Issues in Online Interaction
Social Media Effects: Balancing personal representation and audience segregation.
Multiple identities and online personas may complicate social interactions.
Dating in the Digital Age:
Growing use of dating apps (e.g., Tinder) alters how relationships are initiated.
Differences and preferences influence interactions, often reproducing gender inequalities.
Conclusion: Unanswered Questions
Reflect on the importance of face-to-face interactions.
How do technologies shape social dynamics and norms?
Need to further explore the implications of online interactions on relationship building.