Human beings are social creatures by nature. Socialising and engaging with others is almost as crucial as food and water to our survival. The way in which we communicate has been rapidly evolving over recent years. With advances in technology, the internet, instant messaging and now smartphones, there are many channels and modalities in which to interact with others. However, has our evolutionary brain been able to adapt and keep up with this inundation of communication possibilities? This article examines whether these virtual interactions can replace face-to-face communication in terms of promoting satisfaction and enhancing overall well-being.
Research conducted by Lee et al. (2011) revealed that while face-to-face communication can predict enhanced quality of life, internet communication cannot. While the internet has opened up a new realm of possibilities in terms of connecting with people across the globe, at any time, there are inherent factors in online communication that limit its ability to promote the same levels of satisfaction as traditional face-to-face communication.
Why online communication may be less satisfying than face-to-face
There are many crucial differences between online and face-to-face communication which can lead to online communication being less emotionally satisfying and fulfilling than face-to-face communication. Below are several reasons as to why this may be the case:
- Socializing online takes time away from offline interactions: it goes without saying that the more time an individual spends online, the less time they have to engage with friends and family members in real life. This may lead to a degeneration of the social skills necessary to engage in real life interactions.
- Online interactions may promote passive engagement: online interactions take place in the context of a multitude of platforms, such as Instagram, Twitter and Facebook to mention a few. These distractions can direct an individual away from the conversation and towards passive engagement with the platform, in the form of scrolling. This type of engagement is similar to watching television, which has been shown to decrease mood and overall well-being
- Conversational topics may be of a more shallow nature: As opposed to a face-to-face conversation which can flow naturally, easily seguing from one topic to the next, online conversations may be more restricted. Perhaps the response effort in typing out a long paragraph expressing how you are truly feeling is too great, resulting in short answers that do not properly convey the message. Moreover, online conversations tend to focus on a narrower scope of subject material or may be utilitarian in nature, simply conveying the essential message.
- Interactions may be fragmented and responses delayed: how many times have you seen a message and replied to it several hours or perhaps several days later? Online conversations are not conducive to free, open communication since the communication partner can essentially step out at any time. This insecurity does not foster opening up and sharing on a deeper level for fear that the communication partner may simply disappear. If we do open up and the communication partner does not respond immediately, this can make us feel that our experiences are not valid or worthy of another’s attention.
- Nonverbal cues are less easy to distinguish: According to Birdwhistell (1970), about 65 percent of the social meaning of a situation is derived from nonverbal cues. Even with video options, nonverbal cues can be distorted or concealed making interpretation of those cues more difficult. Without being able to gauge a person’s reaction or emotional state, misunderstandings and miscommunications are likely to occur which can lead to breakdowns and fights within relationships (check out Psychmind’s article on how social media is affecting romantic relationships).
- Interactions in real life may be adversely affected by smartphone presence: simply having a smartphone present when engaging in a face-to-face conversation can have negative effects on the quality of that interaction. With the unending possibilities for entertainment comfortably lodged in one’s pocket, it is easy to become distracted and casually turn the screen on, flick through social media all the while trying to maintain a real life interaction. This implies boredom and a lack of interest with the communication partner and can lead to weaker ties being formed as well as more superficial conversation.
- People may not represent themselves truthfully online: whilst this can be said for online and offline interactions, it is easier to misrepresent oneself online than it is during a face-to-face encounter. It is possible to re-write and edit text endlessly, whereas a slip of the tongue once said cannot be taken back.
Conclusion
Overall, face-to-face communication fosters higher quality interactions than online communication. Is that to say the virtual world has nothing to offer in terms of socializing? Absolutely not. Online communication and social media should be used as supplemental to one’s social life. It should not, however, be integral or the sole source where one socialises and interacts with others. The internet, technology and smartphones have brought with them many benefits. They have increased work flexibility in some fields, allowed for people to remain in touch across continents, made life easier by congregating all necessary tools to pay bills, check emails, talk to loved ones etc. on one device. However, when it comes to our human need to socialize and connect with others, face-to-face communication is still required. In Lee et al.’s (2011) analysis, the researchers found that using the Internet for interpersonal communication had a negative impact on people’s quality of life whereas talking to a friend or family member face-to-face for just 10 minutes had a positive impact on quality of life.
In order to enhance our well-being, we need a healthy balance between our virtual and real worlds. While technology has been able to bring communities and people closer together, it is up to us to foster those connections and nurture them through old fashioned face-to-face encounters. It is vital for us as a human species to be able to continue to connect with others without hiding behind a screen.
References
Rotondi, V., Stanca L., Tomasuolo M. (October 10, 2017). Connecting alone: Smartphone use, quality of social interactions and well-being. Journal of Economic Psychology, 63, 17-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2017.09.001
Lee, P., S., N., Leung, L., Lo, V., Xiong, C., and Wu, T. (2011). Internet Communication Versus Face-to-face Interaction in Quality of Life. Social Indicators Research, 100, 375–389. DOI 10.1007/s11205-010-9618-3
Kraut, Robert & Patterson, Michael & Lundmark, Vicki & Kiesler, Sara & Mukopadhyay, Tridas & Scherlis, William. (1998). Internet Paradox: A Social Technology That Reduces Social Involvement and Psychological Well-Being?. The American psychologist. 53. 1017-31. 10.1037/0003-066X.53.9.1017.
