Hyperpersonal Model - Examples & Application

Examples & Application

• Hian, Chuan, Trevor, and Detenber's 2006 study shows support for the hyperpersonal model. They found that relational intimacy increased at a faster rate in CMC than in FtF interactions.

• Anderson and Emmers-Sommer used hyperpersonal theory to test their predictors of relationship satisfaction in online romantic relationships. Based on hyperpersonal theory, it's likely that users of CMC would feel more satisfaction in an online relationship since the communication is enhanced and there a reduced amount of cues on which to base the relationship.
• In a 2006 study of politeness of requests made via email and voicemail, Kirk Duthler determined that emails were ranked more polite because users had more time to compose their requests compared to the voicemail user. Duthler's study supports hyperpersonal theory. He said: "The filtering of nonverbal cues advantages communicators. Communicators are strategically enabled to manipulate their identity, time the transmission of their messages, and plan, organize, and edit their communication in pursuit of relational goals. Such strategic control in CMC can facilitate negotiation, relationship development, and social tasks."

• The hyperpersonal theory is also confirmed in a study of the disclosure-intimacy link in CMC vs FtF communication. Research proved that CMC "intensified the association between disclosure and intimacy relative to face-to-face interactions, and this intensification was fully mediated by increased interpersonal (relationship) attributions observed in the computer-mediated condition."

• Jeanine Warisse Turner, Jean A. Grube, and Jennifer Meyers discussed in their work, titled ‘Developing an optimal match within online communities: An exploration of CMC support communities and traditional support’, the application of hyperpersonal model in the context of cancer treatment. They found that: 1) CMC can play a significantly important role for patients to seek support, which confirmed the hyperpersonal model in the context of patients’ communication; 2) the experience of face-to-face communication with a partner will enhance the relationship of hyperpersonal communication; 3) a deep face-to-face relationship may lead to an indirect way of communication since partners are concerned with offending others even though they still want to offer support, while CMC communication is more able to focus on a specific goal.

• In 2003, James D. Robinson and Jeanine Turner published a research titled 'Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal social support: Cancer and older adults'. This study focused on the social support and supportive communication of the old with cancer. They explore this fact from the optimal matching perspective brought up by Cutrona and Russell (1990), which demonstrate that “successful socially supportive interactions ... occur when the type of support desired by the individual is of the same type as the social support efforts of the provider.” In this article, the authors cited several previous studies to confirm that hyperpersonal communication is helpful for the olds with cancer illness in seeking social support.

• In the article titled “‘I’ve never clicked this much with anyone in my life’: Trust and hyperpersonal communication in online friendships”, Samantha Henderson and Michael Gilding (2004) explored the development of trust in hyperpersonal communication. They found that, in hyperpersonal communication, 1) online trust depends on the reputation of pseudonymous identities; 2) the online communication performance is essential in building up online trust; 3) hyperpersonal communication and online trust can be facilitated by pre-commitment; 4) situational factors in Western societies can help to promote the active trust in hyperpersonal communication.

• Andrew C. High and Scott E. Caplan(2008) explore the application of hyperpersonal model in the context of mitigating social anxiety caused by the “desire to create a positive impression in social settings along with a general lack of self-presentational confidence.” The result indicated that the association of social anxiety and people’s perception of social anxiety and the association of social anxiety and one’s partner’s conversational satisfaction are contingent in CMC.

• The hyperpersonal model posits that in the absences of cues available in FtF encounters, distributed partners form exaggerated impressions other group members. Pena, Walther and Hancock (2007) looked at perceptions of dominance in collocated virtual groups versus distributed groups. The results indicate that collocated groups perceived member dominance to be less extreme than in distributed groups. But there appeared to be no difference in the way collocated group members and distributed group member’s perceived dominance. This supports the assertion that CMC environments intensify impression development, as suggested by the hyperpersonal models element of selective self-presentation.

• One study looking at perceived behaviors of assigned versus emergent leaders in CMC groups found that the “reification of behavioral stereotypes through hyperpersonal CMC allows emergent leaders to develop greater recognition" (p.2). The question posed by these authors was under which conditions, having an assigned group leader or an unassigned group leader, would a leader emerge in a CMC context. They speculated that leaders emerge in CMC groups, as suggested by the hyperpersonal model, through the development of online behaviors. Wickham and Walther found that in CMC groups, there is greater consensus among group members about the group leader when the leader emerges from the group opposed to leaders being assigned to the group. Within assigned leader groups, leaders were not rated as being more intelligent than other group members. In contrast, in unassigned leader groups, there was a strong associated between perceived intelligence and leader emergence.

• Another study called Facebook: implications of visual cues on initiating friendship on Facebook affirms the "Hyperpersonal Model" in it's results.More males & females showed a preference for attractive profile pictures when it came to initiating friendships.Thus non-verbal cues played an important role in this study. The emotions in virtual communication theory is also thus reaffirmed through this study as well.

• In their study "Mirror Mirror on my facebook wall: effects of exposure to facebook on self esteem" authors Amy Gonzales & Jeffrey T.Hancock used the hyperpersonal model to study whether facebook usage enhanced self esteem or not. The results of this study showed that participants became self aware once they were on their individual profile pages. Once participants edited their facebook profile they reported high levels of self esteem.These findings suggest that selective self representation in digital media leads to intensified relationship formation. Thus a high involvement on social media definitely enhances self esteem.

• In their book "Truth ,Lies & Trust on the internet" authors Monica Whilly and Adam Johnson also affirm the hyperpersonal model. They talka bout the formation of hyperpersonal relationships being formed on the internet due to extreme proximity and closeness. In this book they go one step further and talk about the issues of truth, lies & trust in these relationships. Several stories in the book talk about how the internet's anonymity basically enables high levels of self disclosures in relationships which can in turn possibly lead to deception and flaming.

• In a study titled the "Perceptions of trustworthiness online : the role of visual and textual information by Catalina L.Toma looks at the role of textual information available in a
  • profile versus the images on an individual’s profile
  • The findings were that textual information generally illicited more
  • trustworthiness among profile browsers and the addition of an image reduced

• In another study by ANita L Blanchard titled "Testing a sense of a model of a community" talks about group salience being higher on a virtual community thus once again reaffirming the Hyperpersonal model assumptions.

• In another study titled "the lies we tel and what it says about us :using behvorial characteristics to explain facebook activity" further breaks down online participants of communication into communicators (one to one) & broadcasters (one to many). They hyperpersonal model was affirmed in the communicators group who reported high group cohesion.

• In another study titled "Predictors of relationship satisfaction in online romantic relationships" affirmed the hyperpersonal model by predicting a high rate of satisfaction in relationships fostered online.

• Walther J.B also explored in a a study the effect of CMC on an international collaboartions and further affirmed the theory of hyperpersonal model. The results showed that relationships were fostered better in computer mediated environments versus other mediations.