Computers in Human Behavior Computers in Human Behavior 23 (2007) 1894–1905 www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh
Effects of emotional cues transmitted in e-mail communication on the emotions experienced by senders and receivers Yuuki Kato *, Shogo Kato, Kanji Akahori Graduate School of Decision Science and Technology, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Department of Human System Science, 2-12-1 Ookayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 152-8552, Japan Available online 24 January 2006
Abstract This paper focuses on communication by e-mail. An experiment was conducted to investigate the influence the degree of emotional cues transmitted during e-mail communication has on the emotions experienced by the senders and receivers. Twenty-two participants of this experiment were divided into two groups based on the degrees of emotional cues transmitted: a High group and a Low group. The emotions experienced in the e-mail communication by the High group were then compared to that of the Low group. The results of this experiment showed a tendency for unpleasant emotions such as anger and anxiety to increase when emotional cues transmitted are low (i.e., the Low group). The findings suggest that low degrees of emotional cues transmitted between senders and receivers in e-mail communication tend to cause some misunderstanding. Ó 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Computer-mediated communication; E-mail; Emotional cues transmission
1. Introduction Much research has been conducted on computer-mediated communication, commonly referred to as CMC (Kiesler, Siegel, & McGuire, 1984), and a lot of literature has been *
Corresponding author. Tel.: +81 3 5734 3233. E-mail addresses:
[email protected] (Y. Kato),
[email protected] (S. Kato), akahori @ak.cradle.titech.ac.jp (K. Akahori). 0747-5632/$ - see front matter Ó 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2005.11.005
Y. Kato et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 23 (2007) 1894–1905
1895
written on the subject since it appeared several decades ago. Recently, the use of CMC has become increasingly common in distance education settings (e.g., Garrison & Anderson, 2003; Gunawardena & Zittle, 1997). As a result, there are many studies on CMC which give suggestions for its educational use. Most of the studies focused on the technical or cognitive aspects of CMC (e.g., Sannomiya & Kawaguchi, 1999), which are important for learning. However, it is also important to focus on the emotional aspect of CMC (e.g., Ben-Ami & Mioduser, 2004), since CMC is a medium in which misunderstandings or misinterpretations of emotions occur frequently (e.g., Siegel, Dubrovsky, Kiesler, & McGuire, 1986). Furthermore, some studies in the field of cognitive psychology suggest that emotion affects memory, thinking, and learning (e.g., Bower, 1981; Forgas, 1991). In addition, the importance of social presence (Short, Williams, & Christie, 1976) has also been emphasized in recent researches on distance education (e.g., Gunawardena, 1995). Prior researches have also suggested that the emotional dimension of communications contributes to the degree of social presence (Garrison & Anderson, 2003). As mentioned above, this paper examines the emotional aspect of CMC. 1.1. Interpersonal behaviors in CMC The primary advantage of CMC is that it lacks of a temporal or spatial constraint (Kiesler, 1997; Kiesler et al., 1984; Kiesler & Sproull, 1992). CMC is synonymous to visual anonymity and text-based communication, and both characteristics have been implicated in a variety of interpersonal behaviors. Previous studies have pointed out the positive and negative aspects of CMC based on the above characteristics of CMC (Dietz-Uhler & Bishop-Clark, 2001). On the positive side, when compared to face-to-face communication, commonly referred to as F2FC, CMC is often more impersonal and free (Kiesler et al., 1984), more uninhibited (Siegel et al., 1986; Sproull & Kiesler, 1986, 1991), contains more disclosures of personal information (Joinson, 1998, 2001; Kiesler & Sproull, 1992), more equal-member participation (Sproull & Kiesler, 1993), and more task-oriented interactions (Connolly, Jessup, & Valacich, 1990). As a result, CMC often allows people to feel more comfortable and confident in their discussions (Sato & Akahori, 2004). However, on the negative side, CMC can contain more ‘‘flaming’’ (e.g., hostile comments, insults) (Dyer, Green, Pitts, & Millward, 1995; McGuire, Kiesler, & Siegel, 1987), can be uninhibited and depersonalized (Garton & Wellman, 1995; Walther, Anderson, & Park, 1994), and encourages decision shift (Siegel et al., 1986). In particular, despite initial beliefs that CMC would encourage reasonable communication, it was found that CMC encouraged emotional communication, such as ‘‘flaming’’, instead (Nojima & Gill, 1997). Some models to explain the mechanism of such flaming were therefore proposed; for example, the Reduce Social Cues Model (Sproull & Kiesler, 1991) and the Social Identity and De-individuation (SIDE) Model (Lea, 1992). Most of these models, however, have mostly focused on the sender of the slanderous message. However, there is little research on the relationships between the receivers and senders in CMC. 1.2. Judgment of emotions and emotional cue transmissions Without discounting the merits of asynchronous communication, it can be said that a lot of our daily interactions either take place face-to-face or synchronously. Therefore, it does not come as a surprise that within such contexts, we are highly effective at judging people’s
1896
Y. Kato et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 23 (2007) 1894–1905
characteristics, such as familiarity, gender, emotion or temperament (e.g., Cheng, O’Toole, & Abdi, 2001). Judgement of other’s psychological states is a significant aspect of human interpersonal communication. It refers to the interpersonal process by which people employ all available information and make general judgments. Recent F2FC research (e.g., Krauss & Fussell, 1996; Kraut, 1978) has consistently indicated that both nonverbal and verbal cues jointly affect the process of judgment (Patterson, 1994). Technology now mediates much communication. Phone, e-mail or video-conference: in each case, people must make do with limited cues to help them estimate other people’s emotional states, dispositions and personalities. This is especially so when CMC users cannot see each other and the CMC environment is restricted in terms of nonverbal cues (Sproull & Kiesler, 1991). This has resulted in studies conducted to investigate judgment in CMC contexts (e.g., Gill & Oberlander, 2003; Kato & Akahori, 2004a, 2004b; Kato, Sugimura, & Akahori, 2001; Markey & Wells, 2002; Nass, Moon, Fogg, & Reeves, 1995). In particular, Kato et al. (2001) have focused on judgment of other’s emotional states in e-mail communications, and found gaps between the sender’s self-report of emotional states and the receiver’s judgment of the sender’s emotional states. In addition, Kato and Akahori (2004a, 2004b) have compared the accuracy of judgment of one’s partner’s emotions during e-mail communication to F2FC. Their findings have shown that judgment of emotions in e-mail communication lacks accuracy, and there is a tendency to misjudge the partners’ negative emotions as hostile emotions in e-mail communication. However, there is little research on the relationships between emotions experienced by senders and receivers with the degrees of emotional cues transmitted during communication. 1.3. The need for this study Earlier this year, an unfortunate incident occurred at an elementary school in Japan in which the misunderstanding between classmates over the Internet developed into homicide. While such incidents are not necessarily caused only by the Interne, when the spread of the Internet to schools is taken into consideration, there is a pressing need to examine the emotional aspects of CMC. In CMC, it is often said that others’ emotions cannot be judged correctly (Kato & Akahori, 2004a, 2004b), because of the lack of nonverbal cues, such as facial expressions (e.g., Sproull & Kiesler, 1991). The errors in judging others’ emotions can lead to misunderstanding or quarrel in the process of communication. Therefore, examining the emotional cues transmitted between receivers and senders in CMC is essential. However, there is no experimental research that verifies the influence the degrees of emotional cues transmitted between a sender and a receiver has on the emotions they experienced in CMC. 2. Rationale The present study focuses on e-mail, one of the most common medium of communication in CMC. In addition, the present study concentrates on the aspect of emotions of both senders and receivers in e-mail communication. An experiment was conducted to investigate the influence the degree of emotional cues transmitted between the sender and receiver has on the emotions which they experienced in e-mail communication. Specifically, the experiment and its analysis were performed as follows. We measured expected emotions; emotions the sender assumed would be induced by his/her sent e-mail,
Y. Kato et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 23 (2007) 1894–1905
1897
and perceived emotions, the receiver’s interpretations of the sender’s emotions based on the received e-mail. By emotional cues transmitted, we are referring to the relationships between each of these pairs of expected and perceived emotions experienced by partners in this study. In addition, the actual emotions of both senders and receivers (emotional states at sending and emotional states at receiving, respectively) were also measured. The participants of this experiment were divided into a High group and a Low group by degrees of emotional cues transmitted based on the correlations between the expected emotions and the emotional states at receiving reported by their partners during dispatch of e-mail and the correlations between the perceived emotions and the emotional states at sending reported by their partners during receipt of e-mail. The present study compared the High group to the Low group by focusing on the emotions experienced in e-mail communication to examine the influence of emotional cue transmissions on those emotions. 3. Method 3.1. Participants The participants consisted of 22 university students (20 men and 2 women) enrolled in a faculty of engineering system in Japan. The participants were between the ages of 19 and 31 years old (mean age of 22.4 years). All participants reported using personal computers almost every day. Moreover, 21 participants reported using e-mail with a personal computer every day or several times per week. 3.2. Experimental task The participants were randomly paired and asked to communicate in their pairs using e-mail. The participants were not informed as to whom their partners were, and each participant was given an anonymous e-mail username. In order to standardize the number of e-mails exchanged in all pairs, each participant was instructed to send exactly three e-mails to her/his partner in turns. The experimenter decided who sent the first e-mail, and a total of six e-mails were sent out per pair. ‘‘Juvenile crime’’ was selected as the communication theme. This theme was adopted because many participants had selected it as an interesting topic in the preliminary inquiry and it is also a serious social issue which has been increasing recently in Japan. 3.3. Measurement The participants were asked to complete the following four kinds of questionnaires during the e-mail communication (see Tables 1–4 for examples). These four questionnaires asked about 12 kinds of emotions based on Izard, Libero, Putnam, and Haynes (1993) (Interest, Joy, Surprise, Sadness, Anger, Disgust, Contempt, Anxiety, Guilt, Shyness, Inward Hostility, and Willingness) (Kato et al., 2001, Kato, Sugimura, & Akahori, Table 1 Example of a content item in the perceived emotions questionnaire Perceived emotions I perceive the my partner had interest when he/she composed this e-mail
1898
Y. Kato et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 23 (2007) 1894–1905
Table 2 Example of a content item in the emotional states at receiving questionnaire Emotional states at receiving I felt interest when I read the e-mail from my partner
Table 3 Example of a content item in the expected emotions questionnaire Expected emotions I expect my partner will feel interest when he/she reads this e-mail
Table 4 Example of a content item in the emotional states at sending questionnaire Emotional states at sending I felt interest when I composed and sent the e-mail to my partner
2002). Two of these questionnaires (perceived emotions and emotional states at receiving) measure the emotional aspects on the side of the e-mail receivers. The other two questionnaires (expected emotions and emotional states at sending) measure the emotional aspects on the side of the e-mail senders. The questionnaires consisted of twelve items, one item for each of the twelve emotions. 3.3.1. Measurement of perceived emotions During the e-mail communication, whenever the participants received an e-mail from their partners, they rated what they perceive as their partner’s emotional states when the e-mails were composed, using the perceived emotions questionnaire. The likelihood of each perceived emotions was rated using a five-point scale (1 = not at all true, 5 = very true). This was used as the index of perceived emotions to examine how each participant interpreted their partners’ emotions using the received e-mails. The example below shows the questionnaire item on the likelihood of ‘interest’ on the sender’s side when the e-mail was being composed. 3.3.2. Measurement of emotional states at receiving Whenever the participants received an e-mail from their partners, they also had to rate their own emotional states as they read the e-mails using the emotional states at receiving questionnaire, based on a five-point scale (1 = not at all true, 5 = very true). This was used as the index of emotional states at receiving to examine how each participant felt at the time of reading the received e-mail. The example below shows the questionnaire item on the availability of ‘interest’ on the receiver’s side when the e-mail was being read. 3.3.3. Measurement of expected emotions Whenever the participants sent an e-mail to their partners, they rated the probable emotions the e-mails would induce in their partners in the expected emotions questionnaire. The likelihood of each expected emotions was rated using a five-point scale (1 = not at all true, 5 = very true). This was used as the index of expected emotions to examine the kinds of emotions the sender expected their e-mails would induce in their partners. The
Y. Kato et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 23 (2007) 1894–1905
1899
example below shows the questionnaire item on the likelihood of ‘interest’ on the receiver’s side when the e-mail was being read. 3.3.4. Measurement of emotional states at sending Whenever the participants sent an e-mail to their partners, they also had to rate their own emotional states as they composed and sent the e-mails using the emotional states at sending questionnaire, based on a five-point scale (1 = not at all true, 5 = very true). This was use as the index of emotional states at sending to examine how each participant felt while composing and sending the e-mails. The example below shows of the questionnaire item on the availability of ‘interest’ on the sender’s side when the e-mail was being composed and sent. 3.4. Procedure Upon starting the experiment, the participants were randomly paired, and given the instruction explaining the procedure of the experiment. They were also instructed to write their opinions and responses on the topic sof ‘Juvenile Crime’ unreservedly, based on their own discretions and advised to utilize the emoticons as they would when writing e-mails, to support what they feel. Then, they commenced to communicate by e-mail in their pairs. During the e-mail communication, whenever they received an e-mail from their partners, they answered two questionnaires – perceived emotions and emotional states at receiving. After composing and sending an e-mail, they answered the other two questionnaires – expected emotions and emotional states at sending (see Fig. 1). The entire experiment took up about 50 min, and the length of intervals between sending and receiving e-mails was approximately 4 and a half minute on the average. During the intervals, participants just sat in front of their PCs as they wait for the e-mail from their partners. While waiting, they were instructed not to speak to other participants. 3.5. Experimental system An e-mail system was developed by the authors to be used in this experiment. Fig. 2 shows the experimental system. This system is an improved version of the system used by Kato et al. (2002). The questionnaires for the receiver are displayed below the contents of the e-mail message in this system. After composing and sending the reply, the system automatically displays the page with the questionnaires for the sender. Therefore, all communication which involved receiving an e-mail, answering the questionnaires of perceived emotions and the emotional states at receiving, and sending the reply e-mail, plus answering 4 questionnaires
Perceived Emotions Receiving an e-mail
Emotional states at receiving Expected Emotions
Sending an e-mail
Emotional states at sending
Fig. 1. The flow of the four questionnaires.
1900
Y. Kato et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 23 (2007) 1894–1905
Fig. 2. Experimental system.
the questionnaires of expected emotions and the emotional states at sending, can be performed on this system. In addition, this system is implemented on the Web and it is able to transmit e-mails over the Internet like ordinary mailers. 4. Results and discussion 4.1. Degrees of emotional cues transmitted The participants completed the four kinds of questionnaires in the e-mail communication. Although all the questionnaires are on emotional aspects, they have the following two attributes: intention (sending and receiving) and whose emotions (own and partner’s). The expected emotions at the time of sending refer to the sender’s assumption of what the partner’s emotional states at receiving. Meanwhile the perceived emotions at the time of receiving are the interpretation of the partner’s emotional states at sending. Therefore, two correlation coefficients as shown in Fig. 3 were calculated for every pair, and these correlation coefficients were used to analyze the degrees of emotional cues transmitted. In this study, the degrees of emotional cue transmission of each participant were determined based on the two kinds of correlation coefficients. 4.2. Classifications of the participants In this experiment, all the participants were instructed to send three e-mails to their partners, which means a total of six e-mails exchanged in each pair. Correlation coefficients were computed based on the expected emotions and perceived emotions for each e-mail sent and received by each participant. Based on these correlation coefficients, the participants were classified into two groups; High and Low groups, using the following
Y. Kato et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 23 (2007) 1894–1905
1901
Participant A Composing a mail Sending the mail
Expected Emotions Emotional states at sending
Correlation Correlation
Perceived Emotions
Participant B Receiving the mail
Emotional states at receiving
Composing a mail Sending the mail
Participant A Receiving the mail
Fig. 3. The exchange of e-mails by Participants A and B and two kinds of correlations.
procedure (see Fig. 4). The division of groups was done twice, once based on dispatch and the other based on receipt of e-mails. In the first division, for emotional cues transmitted based on expected emotions, participants with all three correlation coefficients of at least 0.70 were assigned into the High group. In addition, participants whose correlation coefficients increased gradually and exceeded 0.70 by the third time were also assigned to the High group. The rest of the participants were then assigned to the Low group. In the second division, for emotional cues transmitted based on perceived emotions, participants with all three correlation coefficients of at least 0.60 and others whose correlation coefficients became increases gradually and exceeded 0.60 by the third time were assigned into the High group, leaving the other participants assigned to the Low group. 4.3. Comparison of emotions experienced by the participants in the High and Low groups In order to investigate the influence the degrees of emotional cues transmitted has on the emotions produced within the process of e-mail communication, the values in the emotional states at receiving questionnaire were compared. This comparison looked at the degree of emotional cues transmitted based on expected emotions and interpreted emotions, respectively. Based on the result of a factor analysis by Kato et al. (2001), the twelve emo-
1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0. 1 -0. 2 -0. 3 -0. 4 -0. 5 -0. 6 -0. 7 -0. 8 -0. 9 -1
High High
Low
first
second
third
Low
Expected Emotions (dispatch)
1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0. 1 -0. 2 -0. 3 -0. 4 -0. 5 -0. 6 -0. 7 -0. 8 -0. 9 -1
High High
Low
first
second
third
Low
Perceived Emotions (receipt)
Fig. 4. Three correlation coefficients of each participant and classifications of the participants.
1902
Y. Kato et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 23 (2007) 1894–1905
tions in the emotional states at receiving questionnaire were classified into the following three categories: Positive emotions (Interest, Joy, Surprise, Willingness), Hostile emotions (Anger, Disgust, Contempt) and Negative emotions (Sadness, Anxiety, Guilt, Shyness, Inward Hostility). Although it may seem that Hostile emotions are actually a subset of Negative emotions, it is important to note that Hostile emotions are aggressive emotions that would usually leads to trouble. Hence, in the interest of this research, the authors feel that it is important to create a distinction between the two categories. The emotions experienced by the High and Low groups were then compared using the average values of the emotional states at receiving applicable to these categories. 4.3.1. The degree of emotional cues transmitted from the perspective of expected emotions Using the data obtained from the emotional states at receiving questionnaire, emotions experienced in the e-mail communication by the High group (n = 11) were compared to that of the Low group (n = 11). This comparison was conducted using a t test and based on the expected emotions. The mean for each of the groups and the results of the t test are presented in Fig. 5. The main results were as follows. The participants in the Low group experienced significantly more Hostile emotions and Negative emotions (Hostile emotions, t(64) = 3.79, p < 0.01; Negative emotions, t(64) = 4.28, p < 0.01). 4.3.2. The degree of emotional cues transmitted from the perspective of perceived emotions Using the data obtained from the emotional states at sending questionnaire, emotions experienced in the e-mail communication of the High group (n = 13) were compared to that of the Low group (n = 9). This comparison was conducted using the t test and based on the perceived emotions. The mean for each of the groups and the results of the t test are presented in Fig. 6. The main results were as follows. The participants in the Low group experienced significantly more Hostile emotions and Negative emotions (Hostile emotions, t(61) = 3.73, p < 0.01; Negative emotions, t(61) = 3.86, p < 0.01). In addition, they also experienced a significantly less Positive emotions (t(61) = 2.15, p < 0.05). 4.4. General discussion In this study on e-mail communication, expected emotions were regarded as emotional cues transmitted from the side of the sender while perceived emotions were regarded as
Fig. 5. Comparison of emotions in the High and Low groups with respect to expected emotions (dispatch of e-mails). Note: **p < 0.01, t test (two-tailed). The added numerical value shows the mean value in each bar.
Y. Kato et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 23 (2007) 1894–1905
1903
Fig. 6. Comparison of emotions in the High and Low groups with respect to perceived emotions (receipt of e-mails). Note: **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05, t test (two-tailed). The added numerical value shows the mean value in each bar.
emotional cues transmitted from the side of the receiver. In a comparison which focused on these two emotional cue transmissions, one reason for their similarity is that the groups in both classifications consisted of mostly the same participants. However, the level of transmission assigned to a participant does not necessarily depend on that participant alone, as it is a factor of both participants in a pair. For example, when participant A’s capability to interpret emotions is low, or when participant B’s capability to express emotions is low, the degree of emotional cues transmitted between the A–B pair falls. As future work, the logs of e-mails exchanged within each pair will be analyzed, the relationships between the contents of the exchanged e-mails, such as the usage of emoticons and length of e-mail messages, and the emotional cues transmitted will be discussed based on the results obtained by this qualitative analysis. 5. Implications In this study, an experiment was conducted to investigate the influence emotional cues transmitted between senders and receivers have on the emotions they experienced in e-mail communication. The participants were divided into the High and Low emotional cues transmission groups based on two correlations. The first involved the dispatch of e-mails and showed the correlation between the expected emotions and the emotional states at receiving. The second involved the receipt of e-mails and showed the correlations between the perceived emotions and the emotional states at sending. The emotions experienced in communication between the High and Low groups were then compared. The results showed that there is a tendency for unpleasant emotions such as anger and anxiety to increase when emotional cue transmission is low. Low emotional cue transmissions appeared to create frustration in the Low group’s participants. These results suggest that low emotional cues transmissions tend to cause some misunderstanding because such emotions are closely connected with interpersonal problems. Although some previous researches have shown the tendency to misjudge one’ partner’s emotions in e-mail communication, there is no empirical research to verify the influence of emotional cues transmitted on arising emotions. While the initial results of this experiment look promising, the findings in this experimental study are exploratory, and further studies in CMC environments with a different and a bigger number of samples need to be conducted to examine whether demography and cultural differences have any implication on the results.
1904
Y. Kato et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 23 (2007) 1894–1905
Acknowledgments Thanks are due to Dr. Yousuke Morimoto for his valuable advice about the experimental system. And finally we would like to express our sincere thanks to Ms. Safiza Markhayu Yusof for her assistance. References Ben-Ami, O. & Mioduser, D. (2004). The affective aspect of moderator’s role conception and enactment by teachers in a-synchronous learning discussion groups. In: Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2004 (pp. 2831–2837). Bower, G. H. (1981). Mood and memory. American Psychologist, 36, 129–148. Cheng, Y., O’Toole, A., & Abdi, H. (2001). Classifying adults’ and children’s faces by sex: computational investigations of subcategorial feature encoding. Cognitive Science, 25, 819–838. Connolly, T., Jessup, L. M., & Valacich, J. S. (1990). Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone in idea generation in computer-mediated groups. Management Science, 36, 97–120. Dietz-Uhler, B., & Bishop-Clark, C. (2001). The use of computer-mediated communication to enhance subsequent face-to-face discussions. Computer in Human Behavior, 17, 269–283. Dyer, R., Green, R., Pitts, M., & Millward, G. (1995). What’s the flaming problem? CMC – deindividuation or disinhibiting? In M. A. R. Kirby, A. J. Dix, & J. E. Finlay (Eds.). People and computers (x). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Forgas, J. P. (1991). Emotion and social judgments. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Garrison, D. R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st Century: A Framework for Research and Practice. London: Routledge Falmer. Garton, L., & Wellman, B. (1995). Social impacts of electronic mail in organizations: a review of the research literature. In B. R. Burleson (Ed.). Communication yearbook (18, pp. 434–453). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gill, A. J. & Oberlander, J. (2003). Perception of e-mail personality at zero-acquaintance: Extraversion take care of itself; Neuroticism is a worry. In: Proceedings of the 25th annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 1–6). Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1, 147–166. Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computermediated conferencing environment. The American Journal of Distance Education, 11, 8–26. Izard, C. E., Libero, D. Z., Putnam, P., & Haynes, O. M. (1993). Stability of emotion experiences and their relations to traits of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 847–860. Joinson, A. (1998). Causes and implications of disinherited behavior on the internet. In S. Kiesler (Ed.), Culture of the internet (pp. 43–59). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Joinson, A. (2001). Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: the role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 177–192. Kato, Y. & Akahori, K. (2004a). E-mail communication versus face-to-face communication: perception of other’s personality and emotional state. In: Proceedings of ED-MEDIA2004 (pp. 4160–4167). Kato, Y. & Akahori, K. (2004b). The accuracy of judgment of emotions experienced by partners during e-mail and face-to-face communication. In: Proceedings of ICCE2004 (pp. 1559–1570). Kato, Y., Sugimura, K. & Akahori, K. (2001). An affective aspect of computer-mediated Communication: analysis of communications by e-mail. In: Proceedings of ICCE/SchoolNet 2001 (pp. 636–642). Kato, Y., Sugimura, K. & Akahori, K. (2002). Effect of contents of e-mail messages on affections. In: Proceedings of ICCE2002 (pp. 428–432). Kiesler, S. (1997). Preface. In S. Kiesler (Ed.). Culture of the internet (ix–xvi). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 1123–1134. Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L. (1992). Group decision making and communication technology. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52, 96–123. Krauss, R. M., & Fussell, S. R. (1996). Social Psychological models of interpersonal communication. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 655–701). New York: The Guilford Press.
Y. Kato et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 23 (2007) 1894–1905
1905
Kraut, R. E. (1978). Verbal and nonverbal cues in the perception of lying. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 380–391. Lea, M. (Ed.). (1992). Contexts of computer-mediated communication. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Markey, P., & Wells, S. (2002). Interpersonal perception in internet chat rooms. Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 134–146. McGuire, T., Kiesler, S., & Siegel, J. (1987). Group and computer-mediated discussion effects in risk decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 917–930. Nass, C., Moon, Y., Fogg, B., & Reeves, B. (1995). Can computer personalities be human personalities? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 43, 223–239. Nojima, H., & Gill, S. P. (1997). Cultural differences in evaluative communication. The second Conference of The Asian Association of Social Psychology, 139. Patterson, M. L. (1994). Strategic functions of nonverbal exchange. In J. A. Daly & J. M. Wiemann (Eds.), Strategic Interpersonal Communication (pp. 273–293). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Sannomiya, M., & Kawaguchi, A. (1999). Cognitive characteristics of face-to-face and computer-mediated communication in group discussion: An examination from three dimensions. Japan Journal of Educational Technology, 22, 19–25. Sato, K. & Akahori, K. (2004). Enhancing interactivity in face-to-face lecture by using ‘‘board mediated communication’’. In: Proceedings of ED-MEDIA2004 (pp. 146–153). Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., & McGuire, T. W. (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 157–187. Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. London: John Wiley & Sons. Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492–1512. Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections: New ways of working in the networked organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1993). Computers, networks and work. In L. Harasim (Ed.), Global networks: Computers and international communication (pp. 105–120). Cambridge MA: MIT Press. Walther, J. B., Anderson, J. F., & Park, D. W. (1994). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction. Communication Research, 21, 460–487.
