Interaction of Interpersonal, Peer, and Media Influence Sources Online: A Research Agenda for Technology Convergence

This essay renews consideration of how new communication technologies integrates mass, interpersonal, and other communication dynamics, and proposes research to help understand reciprocal social influence processes and information processing patterns in technologyenhanced exchanges. We review discussions about the division and proposed integrations among mass and interpersonal communication research. We argue that recent technologies fostering the intersection of virtual communities and mass messages through Web 2.0 applications offer particular salience to information from anonymous peers, and that a distinctive aspect of many new technologies is that they simultaneously present multiple types of influence sources—mass, peer, and/or interpersonal—in a manner that redefines or re-orders influence processes. We further develop a framework in which interpersonal motivations which computer-mediated communication make especially potent drive mass media information sampling and information processing. New types of public messaging may also be best investigated by stringent analyses of composers’ interpersonal functional goals. Authors’ notes: Authors are listed alphabetically. Affiliations include Department of Telecommunication, Information Studies & Media, Department of Advertising, Public Relations, & Retailing, and Department of Communication. Convergence of Online Influence Sources, 2 The Interaction of Interpersonal, Peer, and Media Influence Sources Online: A Communication Research Agenda for Technology Convergence Developments in communication technologies are raising new questions and resurrecting old questions about the interplay of interpersonal, mass, and—we wish to argue—peer communication. Questions about the interplay of mass media and interpersonal processes are not altogether new. Twenty years ago a special issue of Human Communication Research featured discussions of the “false dichotomy” between mass and interpersonal communication research. These and other critiques of the fields and foci of mass and interpersonal communication seem to focus on three issues: Some of these essays review the history and nature of the paradigms. Others illustrate how traditional mass communication events and interpersonal processes cycle and sequence with one another and have always done so. Yet others suggested the new communication technologies demand a revised view of mass and interpersonal processes; that new technologies blur the boundaries between interpersonal and mass communication events and/or the roles that communicators take on using new systems. Likewise, arguments have been made that the “convergence” of old and new media demands new and unified perspectives on traditionally segregated processes. Some of the questions and assertions on this subject deserve reconsideration in light of recent technological developments, many of which were unforeseen when previous pronouncements were articulated, that change relationships of mass and interpersonal sources. More specifically, some new communication technologies are changing the manner of reception by which individuals acquire information from institutional, interpersonal, and peer information sources. Technology changes the temporal and contiguous presentations of these sources, and may in fact change the information processing and social influence dynamics among these sources; that is, the sequence with which sources are sampled or the simultaneousness with which they appear may have potent effects on the information processing filters and biases. “Media convergence” is a term that has been used to connote several phenomena that are brought about by advancements in telecommunication technology that may change some aspect of the communication process. Sometimes the term refers to the blending of previously individuated mass media: one can watch movies on one’s computer, for example. We wish to discuss another kind of convergence: the potential for simultaneous communication via computers of both conceptually mass and interpersonal channels. For example, one can examine the NYTimes.com while chatting about its content with a friend via Instant Messenger; one can draw political news from a blogger, and post an individual reaction on that blog as a comment. Moreover, in addition to mass and interpersonal sources, new communication technology has made incredibly salient another information source, virtual communities and other forms of peergenerated information, which is accessible at a previously impossible level. This addition may further affect the balance of sources social influence in several settings. How these information streams influence individuals, of course, is not a magic bullet. We believe that in many cases a deeper understanding of the use and influence of these sources may be derived through a renewed focus on the interpersonal goals that may drive users’ information-seeking and processing. How these new Convergence of Online Influence Sources, 3 juxtapositions of institutional, peer, and interpersonal sources may change information processing patterns and effects of information consumption will have much to do with the interplay of motives that drive particular interactions. Technology has also generated new forms of communication, in social networking sites and other systems, which bridge the structural and functional characteristics of mass/interpersonal/peer communication. Such technologies invite research that will advance understanding of how individuals conceptualize communication, instantiate communication strategies, and interpret new mediated message forms and content. The purposes of the present work are several. First, we revisit approaches to the division and interaction of mass and interpersonal communication processes, to see what questions and assertions have been raised that may continue to guide understanding of these processes as they unfold via new technologies. Second, we will attempt to articulate an expanded perspective on the interplay of institutional, peer, and interpersonal sources through contemporary communication technologies, and to articulate research agendas that can help understanding of the information processing patterns that such convergent forms make likely. Third, we identify new forms and functions of mediated communication that challenge previous classifications, in order to invoke principles that may focus research to help explain these new phenomena. Perspectives on Mass/Interpersonal Divisions and Mergers Traditionally, mass communication processes have been conceptualized as oneway message transmissions from one source to a large, relatively undifferentiated and anonymous audience. Interpersonal communication involves smaller numbers of participants who exchange messages designed for, and directed toward, particular others. Interpersonal communication has been considered a two-way message exchange between two or more individuals in which communication strategies are shaped by the instrumental and relational goals of the individuals involved, and the knowledge about one another’s idiosyncratic preferences (see for review Berger & Chaffee, 1989; Cappella, 1989). Several landmark works involve both mass communication and interpersonal processes to render a comprehensive understanding of particular phenomena. The manner in which most people form and change opinions of politics, style, and other cultural issues is well-known to involve mass media messages and interpersonal discussions(e. g., Katz, 1957; Katz & Lazarsfeld, 1955; Lazarsfeld, Berelson, & Gaudet, 1944). Similarly, the integration of mass and interpersonal processes is necessary in order to understand the diffusion of innovations, a communication process that incorporates both mass and interpersonal communication in its very conceptualization (Reardon & Rogers, 1988). Despite their organic relationship in some processes, a review of their conceptual and disciplinary differences shows that the exploration of mass and interpersonal processes often takes place in isolation of one another. This separation helps make clear how they operate together when they do, as well as to set the stage for consideration of their interactions, mergers, and/or convergences. Several commentators have illuminated the causes and consequences of a disciplinary divide between mass and interpersonal communication research. Wiemann, Hawkins, and Pingree (1988) attributed the division to historical and Convergence of Online Influence Sources, 4 academic/bureaucratic differences. Reardon and Rogers (1988) argued that the division developed as a result of scholar’s efforts to define their distinctive contributions to social science. Interpersonal scholars followed the tradition of psychology and social psychology from the 1920s-1930s. Key sources such as Heider’s (1958) Psychology of Interpersonal Relations and the approaches employed by psychologists, sociologists, and anthropologists such as Argyle, Goffman, and Bateson, respectively, helped solidify the relevance of social scientific research on face-to-face interaction and relationships (Reardon & Rogers, 1988), leading to the subarea of interpersonal communication. Mass media research evolved primarily from sociology and political science (Reardon & Rogers, 1988). Mass media research examined how mediated messages affect large audiences. These alternative sub-areas allowed scholars to focus, define, and justify their academic endeavors. Despite its historical utility, this division has been lamented for a variety of reasons. The most prevalent concern is a lack of synthesis between mass and interpersonal communication in terms of the theories and research methods that have developed under alternative foci, to the extent that scholars with functionally similar interests may not be aware of the scientific work being performed outside of their area of specialization (Berger & Chaffee, 1988; Pingree et al., 1988, Reard