Seeing through the screen: is evaluative feedback communicated more effectively in face-to-face or computer-mediated exchanges?
In view of the fact that computer-mediated communication (CMC) such as electronic mail has become increasingly commonplace in recent years, it is important to understand the implications of CMC for social relations. The present study examined how the use of CMC affects the transmission of performance and interpersonal appraisal information. Participants were 80 pairs of previously unacquainted students; pair members were randomly assigned to the role of target or judge. Judges evaluated an essay written by the target and communicated their evaluation in a face-to-face context or via electronic mail. Our main hypothesis was that in FTF as compared with CM exchanges, judges would communicate more positive evaluations and targets ability to accurately discern the judge's evaluation (i.e. their meta-accuracy) would be reduced. Results revealed more positive evaluations communicated by judges, but not lower meta-accuracy for targets, in FTF than CM exchanges. Indeed, for task-relevant information there was some indication of superior meta-accuracy in FTF than CM exchanges. Supplementary analyses suggested that judges provided clearer feedback on task-relevant issues in FTF interactions, conceivably because appraisal information could also be communicated via their nonverbal behavior and/or their motivation to provide an evaluation of high quality was greater in this context.
computer-mediated communication metaperception accuracy interpersonal evaluation