Emotions and the spatialisation of social relations in text‐based computer‐mediated communication

Abstract

This paper advances our knowledge of emotions in virtual teams using text‐based computer‐mediated communication. The literature's preoccupation with the absence of physical cues of emotion has meant we lack both an understanding of how emotions are co‐constructed through interaction and an explanation of their role in the social relations of virtual teams. Adopting a communicative view of emotion, we present the findings of a longitudinal study of a virtual team within a transnational collaborative project. We present three aspects of interaction that demonstrate how team members' experience and understanding of the emotions expressed through, and suppressed from, text‐based messages are influenced by the styles and patterns of interaction enabled by technology. Where our three aspects tend towards stasis, we argue that emotion provides a temporal dimension to a process of ‘spatialising’ social relations by connoting what should change, or what should endure, between people.

Working separately but together: appraising virtual project team challenges

“…The entire research process was underpinned by a review of extant literature to extract relevant information and an empirical survey using a qualitative method. As perceived from Schiller and Mandviwalla (2007), Dennis et al (2011), Jarvenpaa andKeating (2012) and Baralou and McInnes (2013), most studies on virtual teams have been focussed on developed countries within Europe and the Americas. Therefore, a qualitative method was deemed to be the most suitable research strategy to adopt because of the limited number of empirical studies on virtual project teams in Nigeria.…”

Hot Buttons and Time Sinks: The Effects of Electronic Communication During Nonwork Time on Emotions and Work-Nonwork Conflict

“…Although generally overlooked, some research in the electronic communication literature emphasizes that reactions to others' communication are shaped by ingrained relational patterns (Baralou & McInnes, 2013;Boudens, 2005) and individual differences that influence how environmental stimuli are evaluated (Byron & Baldridge, 2007). Byron (2008) posited that social context and receiver factors influence how electronic communication is interpreted and the emotions that are elicited.…”

“…In addition to the communication sender being a critical social context factor (Berlo, 1960), the nature of the relationship one has with his/her supervisor has long been suggested as a paramount consideration for how employees interpret and react to workplace stimuli (Scandura & Graen, 1984;Tepper, 2000), which should include electronic communications. Also, important to the communication exchange process is the central role that characteristics of the receiver play in how information is perceived, cognitively processed, and the emotional responses that result (Baralou & McInnes, 2013;Byron, 2008). Because of the exceedingly blurred demarcation between work and nonwork time and the ubiquitous nature of electronic communication, individual differences in preference for managing the boundaries between work and nonwork are a particularly important receiver characteristic with potential implications for how one reacts to electronic communications received during nonwork time.…”

The Impact of Non-normative Displays of Emotion in the Workplace: How Inappropriateness Shapes the Interpersonal Outcomes of Emotional Displays

“…Despite the relative scarcity of non-verbal cues in computermediated communication, evidence for the presence of emotions and emotion dynamics in this medium is robust (e.g., Derks et al, 2008;Cheshin et al, 2011;Baralou and Mcinnes, 2013). Visual cues, such as emoticons and emojis, have evolved as a means to overcome the lack of non-verbal cues in digital communications (e.g., Dresner and Herring, 2010;Stark and Crawford, 2015;Miller et al, 2016;Hu et al, 2017).…”