Skip to main content Accessibility help
  • Cited by 2
  • Print publication year: 2011
  • Online publication date: June 2012



In our globalized world, communication and interaction increasingly happen online and are mediated through computers and the internet. This is true not only for organizational settings and teams working together, but also for private contacts with family, friends, and even strangers (e.g., Bargh and McKenna, 2004). Theories on computer-mediated communication (CMC) that have described internet-based communication as deficit-laden compared to face-to-face communication (e.g., Kiesler, 1997; Kiesler et al., 1984; Kiesler and Sproull, 1992; Short et al., 1976; Siegel et al., 1986; Sproull and Kiesler, 1986; Strauss and McGrath, 1994) might have difficulty to explain these current developments. On the other hand, these approaches have argued that the cues we rely on in everyday face-to-face interaction are filtered out in computer-mediated communication. While this was certainly true for mere text-based interactions, more recent forms of communication via the internet have adopted numerous additional features and incorporate several of these cues (Antonijevic, 2008; Fullwood and Orsolina, 2007). This is, on the one hand, due to technological advancements, but has, on the other hand, been fostered by creative efforts of the users, as had been predicted by Walther (1992, 1996) in his social information processing and hyperpersonal communication theory. In fact, recent developments in the field of the so-called Web 2.0 show that users themselves often developed several strategies and technologies to support at least partial surrogates for face-to-face interaction, which have led to a steady increase of immediate and increasingly multimodal communication (Ramirez et al., 2002; Walther and Burgoon, 1992; Walther and Parks, 2002).

Related content

Powered by UNSILO
Antonijevic, S. (2008). Expressing emotions online: an analysis of visual aspects of emoticon. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Communication Association, Sheraton New York, New York City.
Bargh, J. A. and McKenna, K. Y. (2004). The internet and social life. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 573–590.
Bente, G., Krämer, N. C., Petersen, A., and Ruiter, J. P. (2001). Computer animated movement and person perception: methodological advances in nonverbal behavior research. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 25 (3), 151–166.
Bente, G., Rüggenberg, S., Krämer, N. C., and Eschenburg, F. (2008). Avatar-assisted net-working. Increasing social presence and interpersonal trust in net-based collaborations. Human Communication Research, 34 (2), 287–318.
Blascovich, J., Loomis, J., Beall, A. C., Swinth, K. R., Hoyt, C. L., and Bailenson, J. N. (2002). Immersive virtual environment technology as a methodological tool for social psychology. Psychological Inquiry, 13, 146–149.
Boyd, D. M. and Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13 (1), article 11.
Burgoon, J. K., Berger, C. R., and Waldron, V. R. (2000). Mindfulness and interpersonal communication. Journal of Social Issues, 56 (1), 105–127.
Cassell, J., Sullivan, J., Prevost, S., and Churchill, E. (eds) (2000). Embodied Conversational Agents. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Choi, V. S., Gray, H. M., and Ambady, N. (2005). The glimpsed world: unintended communication and unintended perception. In Hassin, R. R., Uleman, J. S., and Bargh, J. A. (eds), The New Unconscious (pp. 309–333). New York: Oxford University Press.
Derks, D. (2007). Exploring the Missing Wink: Emoticons in Cyberspace. Heerlen: Open Universiteit Nederland, Academisch proefschrift.
Ekman, P. and Friesen, W. V. (1969). The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: categories, origins, usage, and coding. Semiotica, 1, 49–98.
Fullwood, C. and Orsolina, I. M. (2007). Emoticons and impression formation. Applied Semiotics, 19, 4–14.
Gratch, J., Wang, N., Okhmatovskaia, A., Lamothe, F., Morales, M., and Morency, L. P. (2007). Can virtual humans be more engaging than real ones? In Julie, Jacko (ed.), 12th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Beijing, China2007 (pp. 286–297). Berlin: Springer.
Kappas, A. (2003). What facial expressions can and cannot tell us about emotions. In Katsikitis, M. (ed.), The Human Face: Measurement and Meaning (pp. 215–234). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Kappas, A. (2005). My happy vacuum cleaner. Presented in the context of a symposium on artificial emotions at the 14th Conference of the International Society for Research on Emotion in Bari, Italy, July 11–15, 2005.
Kappas, A. and Descôteaux, J. (2003). Of butterflies and roaring thunder: nonverbal communication in interaction and regulation of emotion. In Philippot, P., Coats, E. J., and Feldman, R. S. (eds), Nonverbal Behavior in Clinical Settings (pp. 45–74). New York: Oxford University Press.
Kiesler, S. (1997). Culture of the Internet. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kiesler, S. and Sproull, L. (1992). Group decision making and communication technology. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 52, 96–123.
Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., and McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 1123–1134.
Kopp, S., Gesellensetter, L., Krämer, N. C., and Wachsmuth, I. (2005). A conversational agent as museum guide – design and evaluation of a real-world application. In Panayiotopoulos, et al. (eds), Intelligent Virtual Agents, LNAI 3661 (pp. 329–343). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Krämer, N. C. (2005). Social communicative effects of a virtual program guide. In Panayiotopoulos, al. (eds), Intelligent Virtual Agents2005 (pp. 442–543). Hamburg: Springer.
Krämer, N. C. (2008a). Soziale Wirkungen virtueller Helfer. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
Krämer, N. C. (2008b). Nonverbal communication. In Blascovich, J. and Hartel, C. (eds), Human Behavior in Military Contexts (pp. 150–188). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Krämer, N. C., Bente, G., and Piesk, J. (2003). The ghost in the machine. The influence of embodied conversational agents on user expectations and user behaviour in a TV/VCR application. In Bieber, G. and Kirste, T. (eds), IMC Workshop 2003, Assistance, Mobility, Applications (pp. 121–128). Stuttgart: Fraunhofer 1RB.
Krämer, N. C., Simons, N., and Kopp, S. (2007). The effects of an embodied agent's nonverbal behavior on user's evaluation and behavioural mimicry. In Pelachaud, al. (eds), Intelligent Virtual Agents2007 (pp. 238–251). Berlin: Springer.
Leyhausen, P. (1967). Biologie von Ausdruck und Eindruck. Teil I. Psychologische Forschung, 31, 113–176.
Nass, C. and Moon, Y. (2000). Machines and mindlessness: social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues, 56 (1), 81–103.
Parise, S., Kiesler, S., Sproull, L., and Waters, K. (1999). Cooperating with life-like interface agents. Computers in Human Behavior, 15, 123–142.
Pütten, A., von, Reipen, C., Wiedemann, A., Kopp, S., and Krämer, N. C. (2008). Comparing emotional vs. envelope feedback for ECAs. In Prendinger, H., Lester, J., and Ishizuka, M. (eds), IVA 2008, LNAI 5208 (pp. 550–551). Berlin: Springer.
Pütten, A., von, Reipen, C., Wiedemann, A., Kopp, S., and Krämer, N. C. (2009). The impact of different embodied agent-feedback on users' behavior. In Ruttkay, al. (eds), Intelligent Virtual Agents2009. Berlin: Springer.
Ramirez, A., Walther, J. B., Burgoon, J. K., and Sunnafrank, M. (2002). Information-seeking strategies, uncertainty, and computer-mediated communication toward a conceptual model. Human Communication Research, 28 (2), 213–228.
Reeves, B. and Nass, C. (1996). The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places. Cambridge University Press.
Regenbrecht, H., Ott, C., Wagner, M., Lum, T., Kohler, P., Wilke, W., and Mueller, E. (2003). An augmented virtuality approach to 3D videoconferencing. Proceedings of the Second IEEE and ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR '03) (pp. 290–291). Tokyo: IEEE Computer Society.
Rickenberg, R. and Reeves, B. (2000). The effects of animated characters on anxiety, task performance, and evaluations of user interfaces. In Turner, T., Szwillus, G., Czerwinski, M., Peterno, F., and Pemberton, S. (eds), Proceedings of the ACM CHI 2000 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference, April 1–6 (pp. 49–56). The Hague, Netherlands: ACM.
Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., and McGuire, T. W. (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37(2), 157–187.
Sproull, L. and Kiesler, S. (1986) Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492–1512.
Sproull, L., Subramani, M., Kiesler, S., Walker, J. H., and Waters, K. (1996). When the interface is a face. Human–Computer Interaction, 11(2), 97–124.
Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: a relational perspective. Communication Research, 19, 52–90.
Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3–43.
Walther, J. B. (2006). Nonverbal dynamics in computer-mediated communication, or: (and the net: ('s with you,:) and you:) alone. In Manusov, V. and Patterson, M. L. (eds), Handbook of Nonverbal Communication (pp. 461–479). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Walther, J. B. and Burgoon, J. K. (1992). Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction. Human Communication Research, 19, 50–88.
Walther, J. B. and D'Addario, K. P. (2001). The impacts of emoticons on message interpretation in computer-mediated communication. Social Science Computer Review, 19, 323–345.
Walther, J. B. and Parks, M. R. (2002). Cues filtered out, cues filtered in: computer-mediated communication and relationships. In Knapp, M. L. and Daly, J. A. (eds), Handbook of Interpersonal Communication (3rd edn., pp. 529–563). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.