File Download
Supplementary

Conference Paper: What are the differences between face-to-face and computer-mediated social support?

TitleWhat are the differences between face-to-face and computer-mediated social support?
Authors
Issue Date2013
PublisherAmerican Psychological Association.
Citation
The 121st Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association (APA 2013), Honolulu, HI., 31 July-4 August 2013. How to Cite?
AbstractPrevious studies of face-to-face (FTF) social support have shown that support experiences entail a cost for recipients with high self-esteem and such findings corroborate with Fisher’s threat-to-self-esteem model. However, recent studies of computer-mediated communication (CMC) or the Internet support groups have emphasized that CMC support can be an advantageous for which individuals could seek and experience support without worrying about one’s self-image. In this light, could the threat-to-self-esteem dilemma be documented only in FTF support but not in CMC support interactions? Could people report less negative impacts of experiencing social support via CMC than FTF interactions? Sixty-two undergraduate students were recruited for a quasi-experiment to explore these unresolved issues. Each participant completed a set of questionnaires, reported a recent stressful encounter, and recalled either a FTF or CMC support interaction corresponding to the reported stressor. Afterward, they completed another set of questionnaires including self evaluation measures and demographic information. To investigate the differences in participants’ subjective evaluation of themselves between FTF and CMC support interactions, four independent sample t-tests were carried out. For participants with low self-esteem (n = 27), the results showed no statistical significant differences between the FTF and CMC support interactions in any criterion variables. However, for participants with high self-esteem (n = 35), there were significant differences in self consciousness and social comparison between two conditions. Participant who recalled a FTF support act significantly reported higher levels of concern in one’s public self-image and experienced higher levels of unfavorable social comparison than their counterparts who recalled a CMC support interaction. Preliminary analyses indicate that there are substantial differences between FTF and CMC support and individuals with high self-esteem are more likely to benefit from CMC support.
DescriptionPoster Session 8 - Personality and Social Psychology-II: ID: 3109
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/190234

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChan, SMPen_US
dc.contributor.authorCheng, Cen_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-09-17T15:15:56Z-
dc.date.available2013-09-17T15:15:56Z-
dc.date.issued2013en_US
dc.identifier.citationThe 121st Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association (APA 2013), Honolulu, HI., 31 July-4 August 2013.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/190234-
dc.descriptionPoster Session 8 - Personality and Social Psychology-II: ID: 3109-
dc.description.abstractPrevious studies of face-to-face (FTF) social support have shown that support experiences entail a cost for recipients with high self-esteem and such findings corroborate with Fisher’s threat-to-self-esteem model. However, recent studies of computer-mediated communication (CMC) or the Internet support groups have emphasized that CMC support can be an advantageous for which individuals could seek and experience support without worrying about one’s self-image. In this light, could the threat-to-self-esteem dilemma be documented only in FTF support but not in CMC support interactions? Could people report less negative impacts of experiencing social support via CMC than FTF interactions? Sixty-two undergraduate students were recruited for a quasi-experiment to explore these unresolved issues. Each participant completed a set of questionnaires, reported a recent stressful encounter, and recalled either a FTF or CMC support interaction corresponding to the reported stressor. Afterward, they completed another set of questionnaires including self evaluation measures and demographic information. To investigate the differences in participants’ subjective evaluation of themselves between FTF and CMC support interactions, four independent sample t-tests were carried out. For participants with low self-esteem (n = 27), the results showed no statistical significant differences between the FTF and CMC support interactions in any criterion variables. However, for participants with high self-esteem (n = 35), there were significant differences in self consciousness and social comparison between two conditions. Participant who recalled a FTF support act significantly reported higher levels of concern in one’s public self-image and experienced higher levels of unfavorable social comparison than their counterparts who recalled a CMC support interaction. Preliminary analyses indicate that there are substantial differences between FTF and CMC support and individuals with high self-esteem are more likely to benefit from CMC support.-
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherAmerican Psychological Association.-
dc.relation.ispartof121st APA Convention 2013en_US
dc.rights121st APA Convention 2013. Copyright © American Psychological Association.-
dc.titleWhat are the differences between face-to-face and computer-mediated social support?en_US
dc.typeConference_Paperen_US
dc.identifier.emailCheng, C: ceccheng@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityCheng, C=rp00588en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_OA_fulltext-
dc.identifier.hkuros223034en_US
dc.publisher.placeUnited States-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats