The purpose of this study was to examine language formality and informality in online counseling sessions. Specifically, the author compared undergraduate student (n = 224) perceptions of college counselors' use of informal language and mirroring of client's formality in four mock online counseling scenarios. A multivariate analysis of covariance found significant differences between conditions. Pairwise analyses revealed that counselors who used informal language following their client's formal expressions were perceived as having less expertise. However, language mirroring seemed to moderate perceptions of expertise when counselors followed their client's informal language use.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
JonesS, Johnson-YaleC, PerezF, SchulerJ. The Internet landscape in college. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 2007; 106:39–51.
2.
MaplesM, HanS. Cybercounseling in the United States and South Korea: Implications for counseling college students of the millennial generation and the networked generation. Journal of Counseling & Development, 2008; 86:178–83.
3.
HaasA, KoestnerB, RosenbergJet al.An interactive web-based method of outreach to college students at risk for suicide. Journal of American College Health, 2008; 57:15–22.
4.
LintvedtO, SørensenK, ØstvikAet al.The need for web-based cognitive behavior therapy among university students. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 2008; 26:239–58.
5.
BaronJ, BierschwaleD, BleibergJ. Clinical implications of students' use of online communication for college psychotherapy. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 2006; 20:69–77.
6.
American Counseling Association. 2005. Code of ethics and standards of practice. Alexandria, VA: Author.
7.
American Psychological Association. Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 2002; 57:1060–73.
8.
Center for Credentialing and Education. Distance credentialed counselor (DCC)http://www.cce-global.org/credentials-offered/dccmain. 2008 Oct. 8.
9.
National Association of Social Workers. 2001. NASW & ASWB standards for technology and social work practice. Washington, DC: Author.
10.
MallenMJ, VogelDL, RochlenAB.The practical aspects of online counseling: Ethics, training, technology, and competency. Counseling Psychologist, 2005; 33:776–818.
11.
RochlenAB, ZackJ, SpeyerC. Online therapy: Review of relevant definitions, debates and current empirical support. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 2004; 60:269–83.
12.
TrepalH, HaberstrohS, DuffeyTet al.Considerations for teaching online counseling skills: Establishing a relationship in cyberspace. Counselor Education & Supervision, 2007; 46:266–79.
13.
JonesS. 2002. The Internet goes to college: How students are living in the future with today's technology. http://www.pewinternet.org. 2008 Sep. 20.
14.
SuzukiL, CalzoJ. The search for peer advice in cyberspace: An examination of online teen bulletin boards about health and sexuality. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 2004; 25:685–98.
15.
GrayNJ, KleinJD, NoycePRet al.Health information-seeking behaviour in adolescence: The place of the Internet. Social Science & Medicine, 2004; 60:1467–78.
16.
RideoutV. 2001. Generation rx.com: How young people use the Internet for health information. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation.
17.
GordonC, JuangL, SyedM. Internet use and well-being among college students: Beyond frequency of use. Journal of College Student Development, 2007; 48:674–88.
18.
BarakA, Dolev-CohenM. Does activity level in online support groups for distressed adolescents determine emotional relief. Counselling & Psychotherapy Research, 2006; 6:120–4.
19.
Quan-HaaseA. Instant messaging on campus: Use and integration in university students' everyday communication. The Information Society, 2008; 24:105–15.
20.
ProvineR, SpencerR, MandellD. Emotional expression online emoticons punctuate website text messages. Journal of Language & Social Psychology, 2007; 26:299–307.
21.
DerksD, BosA, von GrumbkowJ. Emoticons in computer-mediated communication: Social motives and social context. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 2008; 11:99–101.
22.
LingR, BaronN. Text messaging and IM linguistic comparison of American college data. Journal of Language & Social Psychology, 2007; 26:291–8.
23.
WaltherJB. Language and communication technology: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Language & Social Psychology, 2004; 23:384–96.
24.
CorriganJD, SchmidtLD. Development and validation of the counselor rating form. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1983; 30:64–75.
25.
TraceyTJ, GliddenCE, KokotovicAM. Factor structure of the counseling rating form—Short. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1988; 35:330–5.
26.
StevensS. 2002. Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences, 4th. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
27.
RochlenA, BeretvasS, ZackJ. The online and face-to-face counseling attitudes scales: A validation study. Measurement & Evaluation in Counseling & Development, 2004; 37:95–111.
