Closeness and other affiliative outcomes generated from the Fast Friends procedure: A comparison with a small-talk task and unstructured self-disclosure and the moderating role of mode of communication

Abstract

A Fast Friends procedure was created years ago as a method to generate closeness between people interacting for the first time and to provide an experimental procedure to test hypotheses about factors that may lead to initial closeness. In their original study, Aron et al. (1997) validated their closeness-generating task by comparing the degree of interpersonal closeness it generated versus that by a small-talk task. Few subsequent studies, however, have tested the validity of the closeness task by comparing the affiliative outcomes resulting from it with that from other activities. To further examine its validity, this study involved zero-history dyads randomly assigned to become acquainted through either Aron et al.’s closeness-inducing task, Aron et al.’s small-talk task, or an unstructured getting-acquainted task. The dyads were then compared on the closeness they experienced as well as on several other affiliative outcomes. In support of the validity of the closeness-inducing task, the task generated more closeness and other positive outcomes, relative especially to the small-talk task. A second manipulation in the study was the mode of communication (video-chat vs. face-to-face). No significant differences in outcomes (e.g., closeness, liking) were found based on mode of communication. Furthermore, the effectiveness of the closeness task (relative to the other tasks) for generating closeness and other affiliative outcomes was not moderated by the mode of communication.

Forming meaningful connections between strangers in virtual reality: Comparing affiliative outcomes by interaction modality.

“…Past research has examined how reciprocal interpersonal communication promotes affiliative outcomes (e.g., Sprecher et al, 2013) and how technology (including in the form of computer-mediated communication, or CMC) can be used to induce closeness among previously unacquainted people (Antheunis et al, 2007;Sprecher, 2021). However, no previous research has examined the generation of closeness in VR and no research to date has studied how initial social interactions that occur in VR compare to other interaction modalities so as to establish their relative effects on the induction of various affiliative outcomes.…”

“…As communication modalities increase in sensory richness, modality effects appear to attenuate. Indeed, research has demonstrated no significant differences in affiliative outcomes obtained between strangers involved in face-to-face (FTF) versus video-based (e.g., Skype video) interactions (e.g., Sprecher, 2021).…”

Ratings of the physical attractiveness of an interaction partner after a getting‐acquainted interaction

“…We also then tested H4 with a much smaller sample. Study 11 included manipulation of the type of get‐acquainted task (see Sprecher, 2021). The One‐way ANOVA conducted with the data in this subsample yielded no significant differences in how the interaction partner was rated on physical attractiveness as a function of whether the dyad engaged in Aron et al's (1997) closeness task ( M = 4.75, SD = 1.32), engaged in Aron et al's small‐talk task ( M = 4.57, SD = 1.17), or were just directed to become acquainted through a free‐format procedure ( M = 4.70, SD = 1.20) ( F [2196] = .37, p = .690, η 2 = .00).…”

“…The use of communication technologies has increased in recent years including to become acquainted with others. Prior research, including one of the social interaction studies (Sprecher, 2021) from the set of studies compiled for this analysis, has indicated very little difference in relationship outcomes (e.g., closeness, liking) experienced between dyads becoming acquainted through a video form of communication (e.g., Skype) versus face-to-face (Antheunis et al, 2007;Croes et al, 2016Croes et al, , 2019Ramirez Jr & Burgoon, 2004;Sprecher, 2021). It has been argued that both modes of communication are cue-rich (Croes et al, 2016) although face-to-face communication provides a greater number of social cues.…”

Realistic Motion Avatars are the Future for Social Interaction in Virtual Reality

“…In the present study after each interaction participants were asked to rate their experience regarding enjoyment, closeness, self-disclosure, comfort, and awkwardness. This methodological approach and specific items were inspired by prior research conducted by Sprecher and others on people rating their experience of brief social interactions (Sprecher, 2014;Sprecher, 2021;Sprecher & Hampton, 2017;Sprecher et al, 2016). Like this prior research, we were anticipating that participants would overall report a high level of enjoyment, closeness, feeling understood, self-disclosure, and comfort with their partner during face-to-face interactions (and low awkwardness).…”