Computer-mediated communication (CMC) and social support

Abstract

Despite the growth in research examining the use of computer-mediated communication (CMC) for exchanging social support, there remains much to learn about the support-related implications of CMC. An experiment was conducted to examine the influence of the reduced social cues associated with CMC on the outcomes of supportive interaction. Participants discussed a stressor with a confederate either face-to-face or via CMC and received informational or emotional support. Although they received the exact same support messages, participants in the CMC condition reported significantly greater worry and uncertainty discrepancy following the interaction than participants in the face-to-face condition. A main effect was also found for support message type. Consistent with the optimal matching model, informational support led to more beneficial outcomes than emotional support in response to the (controllable) stressor experienced by participants.

Digital support seeking in adolescent girls: A qualitative study of affordances and limitations

“…Furthermore, adolescents who used high levels of online emotional support seeking were found to experience increases in worry, jealousy, and loneliness (Duvenage et al, 2020). Similarly, Rains et al (2017) found that college students who received support via IMing experienced higher levels of uncertainty and worry than those who received the same support in-person in an experimental study. Finally, in recent work by Vermeulen et al (2018a), Flemish adolescents identified that they preferred to share emotions face-to-face rather than online.…”

“…Many adolescents report finding that self-disclosure is easier online than in face-to-face contexts (Schouten et al, 2007). This view is supported by the hyperpersonal communication model, in which reduced social cues in electronic exchanges stimulate self-disclosure through an 'online disinhibition effect' (Rains et al, 2017;Suler, 2004;Walther et al, 2015). Increased self-disclosure in turn predicts having higher quality friendships (Valkenburg & Peter, 2009).…”

“…One possibility is that the quality of support received electronically is poorer than that received in-person. For example, text-based support is devoid of facial expressions and physical gestures, which are often used to determine whether advice or feedback is genuine (Rains et al, 2017). In support of this possibility, Lewandowski and colleagues (2011) found that adults who received support in-person reported feeling more positive about the supportive interaction than those who received support via digital media.…”

SMS counselling at a child helpline: counsellor strategies, children’s stressors and well-being

“…Several studies investigating helper behaviour have developed a distinction between (1) behaviour focusing on problem solving and removal of stressors (problem-centred counsellor behaviour, PCCB) and (2) helper behaviour focusing on building alliance and giving emotional support to the help-seeker (client or child-centred counsellor behaviour, CCCB) (Burleson, & Goldsmith,1998;Cutrona, 1990;Cutrona & Suhr, 1992;Horowitz et al, 2001;Jones & Burleson, 1997;Mishara et al, 2007) also in the context of child helplines (Fukkink, 2011;van Dolen & Weinberg, 2017;Williams, Bambling, King, & Abbott, 2009). The concept of support matching assumes that people dealing with different types of problems (stressors) may benefit from different types of support (Cutrona, 1990;Cutrona & Russell, 1990;Green-Hamann & Sherblom, 2014;Horowitz et al, 2001;Loane & D'Alessandro, 2013;Rains et al, 2015;Rains, Brunner, Akers, Pavlich, & Goktas, 2017;van Dolen & Weinberg, 2017). The theory of Lazarus and Folkman (1984) predicts that an emotion-focused coping approach (also referred to here under CCCB) is more effective in cases of uncontrollable events, whereas individuals impacted by controllable events might benefit more from a problem-centred approach (also referred to here as PCCB), providing instrumental support in the form of information and advice (Cutrona, 1990;van Dolen & Weinberg, 2017).…”

Online communication, peer relationships and school victimisation: a one-year longitudinal study during middle adolescence

“…Whilst in the nineties some studies identified several negative effects of online communication, such as the addictive use, casual relationships with strangers and cyberbullying, current studies have highlighted, rather than risks, certain benefits (Ahn, 2011;Rains, Brunner, Akers, Pavlich, & Goktas, 2016). A recent review described several benefits of online communication, such as an increase in self-esteem, perceived social support and social capital, more confidence in identity experimentation and more revelation opportunities (Valkenburg & Peter, 2009).…”