Media Effects Research Lab - Research Archive
The Role of Modality in Returning to Normal Conversation after a Conflict
Student Researcher(s)
DJ Barger (Ph.D Candidate);
Julian Canjura (Ph.D Candidate);
Faculty Supervisor
This paper was based on a project as part of the Psychological Aspects of Communication Technology (COMM 517) course.
INTRODUCTION
Our study examines how couples return to normal communication after a conflict. We look at the choice of mode for this conversation and the perceptions of affordances for the chosen mode. We theorize that some types of people may value the things they can do with technology more than the things they receive from in-person communication, thus causing them to want to use a mediated mode of communication.
RESEARCH QUESTION / HYPOTHESES
RQ1: What communicative modalities do participants utilize in initiating reconciliatory actions with their romantic partner after an argument or conflict?
RQ2: How do participants perceive utilized modalities, their affordances, and how those affordances contribute to or facilitate their reconciliatory actions?
METHOD
We used a survey with a mixture of scale variables, measures, categorical demographic questions, and open-response questions. The open-ended questions asked participants to talk about why they chose a particular mode and what was said. The close-ended responses asked about perceptions of affordances.
RESULTS
For RQ1, we found that our participants mainly used just face-to-face and texting for these conversations. For RQ2, we found that participants who used texting tended to find it higher in conversation control, editability, and persistence. Participants who used face-to-face found it higher in bandwidth and social presence. Separately, we found that many participants preferred to use a different mode than they did, but said convenience or proximity caused them to use the mode they did.
CONCLUSIONS/DISCUSSION
Our results support the ideas of modality weaving and mode integration. Participants used the modes available to them at the time, even though they may have preferred something else. A future study could investigate this phenomenon further and quantitatively extend the concepts of modality weaving and communicative interdependence. The study may also give ideas to couples wishing to improve their conflict, possibly by integrating different modes of communication in a way that works for them. Finally, our study was limited by its scope. Our sample size was too small to make generalizations, but big enough to have potential implications and takeaways.
For more details regarding the study contact
Dr. S. Shyam Sundar by e-mail at sss12@psu.edu or by telephone at (814) 865-2173