Search

This paper contributes to the presence literature by explicating the meanings and subtypes of copresence. Copresence is defined here as consisting of two dimensions: copresence as mode of being with others, and copresence as sense of being with others. Mode of copresence refers to the physical conditions that structure human interaction. Six such conditions are delineated. Sense of copresence, on the other hand, refers to the subjective experience of being with others that an individual acquires in interaction. The main argument of this paper is that mode of copresence affects sense of copresence, and knowledge of how the former affects the latter will benefit copresence design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper extends and integrates existing trust conceptual models in order to highlight the influential role of holistic trust. The authors suggest that humans use generalized assumptions of trust (holistic) as the foundations for interpersonal trust (dyadic). Holistic trust is defined by Lewis and Wiegert (1985) as "a reciprocal orientation and interpretative assumption that is shared, has the social relationship as the object, and is symbolized by intentional action." Simply speaking, holistic trust is that trust we hold in our societal institutions and culture that underlies the dyadic trust used each day to guide our interactions with other individuals. In addition, this paper proposes an empirically testable model of the potential influences of holistic trust on dyadic trust forms including interpersonal trust. Since previous models of trust formation and maintenance have not acknowledged the pervasive influence of holistic trust, we attempt to correct this oversight. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human social interaction is often intermittent. Two acquainted persons can have extended periods without social interaction punctuated by periods of repeated interaction. In this case, the repeated interaction can be characterized by a seed initiative by either of the persons and a number of follow-up interactions. The tendency to initiate social interaction plays an important role in the formation of social networks and is in general not symmetric between persons. In this paper, we study the dynamics of initiative by analysing and modeling a detailed call and text message network sampled from a group of 700 individuals. We show that in an average relationship between two individuals, one part is almost twice as likely to initiate communication compared to the other part. The asymmetry has social consequences and ultimately might lead to the discontinuation of a relationship. We explain the observed asymmetry by a positive feedback mechanism where individuals already taking initiative are more likely to take initiative in the future. In general, people with many initiatives receive attention from a broader spectrum of friends than people with few initiatives. Lastly, we compare the likelihood of taking initiative with the basic personality traits of the five factor model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In general terms, Social Presence is a feeling of togetherness regardless of spatial or temporal separation. It is a socioemotional attitude that reflexively centres on other people, via perceptions of their affective attitudes towards oneself. Communication technologies contribute to the maintenance of close personal relationships by facilitating welcome and timely socioemotional presence in the mind of an absent other. Presence of this kind may be 'in the moment' of communication and also persist over time, as it is 'topped up' through repeated interactions. In this paper, we consider how type of personal relationship and degree of physical separation might condition the Social Presence value of a range of media. We report ratings of Closeness and Social Presence that were gathered over 21 days by 64 participants about the close personal relationships that were meaningful to them. We contrast the communication media they chose to use across four relationship types and whether separations were in the same or in a different city. Our findings are used to discuss new ways of thinking about the connection between people who care about one another, and the meaning of the void that separates them, through the time course of Social Presence and Closeness experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper traces a line between Simmel’s formal sociology, his little-reviewed concept of ‘forms of second order’, his apriorities for social life and his incipient sociology of emotions. Thus different elements of Simmel’s sociology are brought together and linked. These elements were all present in his 1908 monograph, Sociology, but were not connected to each other in the way that they have been interconnected here. The social form of ‘gratitude’ is presented as a paradigmatic ‘form of second order’, and thus illustrates the way in which forms of sociation, especially second-order forms of sociation, are deeply connected to the apriorities of social life. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The diffusion of social networks has stimulated folksonomy-based systems (hereafter, folk-systems) to equip themselves with functionalities for the management of social relationships among users. This suggests that folk-systems and social networks have many 'points of contact'. At the same time, social networks are evolving toward social internetworking systems, i.e. systems where several social networks are simultaneously considered and where users are allowed to interact with each other, even if they belong to different social networks. This trend, presumably, could extend to folk-systems. In this paper, we investigate this issue. In particular, first we introduce the concept of social inter-folksonomy based systems (hereafter, SIFS); after this, we introduce a hypergraph-based model to represent and handle a SIFS. Finally, we present an approach for the derivation of a virtual thematic folk-system from a SIFS, i.e. a fragment of SIFS centered on one or more topics which has all the properties and the functionalities of a real folk-system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social psychology and social network research are both centrally concerned with human sociality. Despite some historically significant interactions between the two, these areas of investigation have not been usefully deployed together in recent research endeavours. The present paper attempts to bring out some points of both theoretical and methodological contentions, to characterize the gap between them, to traverse briefly the trajectories of their historical development, and to provide some concrete instances of these differences. Intellectual resources available to Asian social psychology are reviewed, which may help bridge the gap between the two areas of research. We conclude by calling for a greater integration of social psychology and social network perspectives in future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Today's mobile phone is a pervasive tool. It has become such an important aspect of a user's daily life that it has moved from being a mere 'technological object' to a key 'social object'. This paper explores the societal and human implications of advances in mobile technology, and notably the increasingly personalized nature of the mobile device. It argues that human and identity and social interaction have not been untouched by the mobile phenomenon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social exchange theory (SET) provides a comprehensive description of how people interact within relationships, as well as how they make decisions outside of partnerships and groups. This theory, how- ever, does not address how social structure and power processes influence this exchange. Specifically, it fails to recognize how gender shapes the way people behave within relationships. In this paper, we summarize the constructs and assumptions of SET, critique the theory and highlight areas of omission related to gender, and we address culture and other contextual issues that may affect the application of this theory. Finally, we provide a case example demonstrating how clinicians and researchers may consider gender issues in a social exchange process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We analyze and review how research on emotion and emotional phenomena can elaborate and improve contemporary social exchange theory, After identifying six approaches from the psychology and sociology of emotion, we illustrate how these ideas bear on the context, process, and outcome of exchange in networks and groups. The paper reviews the current state of the field, develops testable hypotheses for empirical study, and provides specific suggestions for developing links between theories of emotion and theories of exchange. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Moscovici has ushered in the 'era of social representations', widely welcomed as a European alternative to what are increasingly regarded as the shortcomings of mainline' American social psychology. The rapid and enthusiastic adoption by many psychologists of Moscovici's theoretical approach has not so far evoked a great deal of critical appraisal of the ideas he put forward. The present paper seeks to make a start in filling this gap by an examination of the conceptual structure and sonic of its underlying assumptions. There appear to be a number of internal inconsistencies and some doubt concerning the logical status of social representations'. It is suggested that clarification of such issues, together with the establishment of closer links with the findings of neighbouring disciplines, would help to strengthen what is undoubtedly one of the most stimulating new departures in the field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Throughout his writings, Erving Goffman develops the principle that successful impression management requires an appearance of "spontaneous involvement" as evidence of individuals' sincerity. Goffman never articulates this principle in terms of how persons are actually-indeed, as he sometimes recognizes, necessarily involved spontaneously in the social environment. This paper asks: What does it mean for our reading of Goffman and of social situations generally if we move the proposition of the experiential necessity of spontaneous involvement to the center of sociological analysis? I discuss why it never moved to the center of Goffman's inquiries, and then argue that a theory of habit facilitates an elaborate of its sociological significance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]