The microdynamics of social regulation: Comparing the navigation of disagreements in text-based online and face-to-face discussions

Carla A Roos,Tom Postmes,Namkje Koudenburg

doi:10.1177/1368430220935989

Carla A Roos, Tom Postmes + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220935989

Copy DOI

Abstract

This study explores how people navigate the field of tension between expressing disagreement and maintaining social relationships in text-based online as compared to face-to-face discussions. In face-to-face discussions, differences of opinion are socially regulated by introducing ambiguity in message content coupled with instant responding on a relational level. We hypothesized that online messages are less ambiguous and less responsive, both of which may hinder social regulation. Thirty-six groups of three unacquainted students discussed politically controversial statements via chat, video-chat (nonanonymous), and face-to-face, in a multilevel repeated measures Graeco-Latin square design. Content coding revealed that online discussions were relatively clear and unresponsive. This related to participants experiencing reduced conversational flow, less shared cognition, and less solidarity online. These results suggest that ambiguity and responsiveness enable people to maintain social relationships in the face of disagreement. This emphasizes the key role that subtle microdynamics in interpersonal interaction play in social regulation.

Highlights

This study explores how people navigate the field of tension between expressing disagreement and maintaining social relationships in text-based online as compared to face-to-face discussions
In faceto-face (FtF) interactions, social regulation is achieved through various conversational techniques that often combine a high degree of ambiguity in message content with instant relational feedback
The conversational techniques of social regulation are most needed in situations where politically controversial topics are discussed among relative strangers: when there is a high potential for disagreement in the absence of preexisting social relationships

Summary

Introduction

This study explores how people navigate the field of tension between expressing disagreement and maintaining social relationships in text-based online as compared to face-to-face discussions. This related to participants experiencing reduced conversational flow, less shared cognition, and less solidarity online These results suggest that ambiguity and responsiveness enable people to maintain social relationships in the face of disagreement. This emphasizes the key role that subtle microdynamics in interpersonal interaction play in social regulation. In faceto-face (FtF) interactions, social regulation is achieved through various conversational techniques that often combine a high degree of ambiguity in message content with instant relational feedback. Disagreement is often conveyed through implicit and intrinsically ambiguous verbal or nonverbal cues, including brief silences, nods, and/or frowns (Brennan & Clark, 1996; Koudenburg et al, 2013b; Reid et al, 2003)

Objectives

Methods

Discussion

Conclusion