People can foster social connection in new relationships through intimate conversation comprised of reciprocal self-disclosure and responsiveness, but the limited affordances of text-based communication may hinder this process. The present study examined the effectiveness of intimate conversation in promoting social connection during texting and in-person interactions. Two hundred and eighty-six unacquainted dyads (N = 572) were randomly assigned to have an intimate or small talk conversation that occurred face-to-face or via text messaging on a smartphone. Afterward, participants reported how socially connected they felt to their conversational partner, including their self-disclosure, perceived partner responsiveness, and interpersonal closeness. Participants reported greater social connection after intimate (vs. small talk) and face-to-face (vs. texting) conversations, but the effect of intimate conversation did not differ across the two mediums. Exploratory mediation analyses revealed a serial indirect effect of conversation medium on social connection, such that texting (vs. face-to-face) interactions led to lower self-disclosure, which was then associated with lower perceived responsiveness and closeness. These findings suggest people can connect over texting through intimate conversation, but they may be less likely to self-disclose over texting than in face-to-face interactions, which can have downstream consequences for interpersonal closeness.
AronA.AronE. N.SmollanD. (1992). Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(4), 596–612. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.596
4.
AronA.MelinatE.AronE. N.ValloneR. D.BatorR. J. (1997). The experimental generation of interpersonal closeness: A procedure and some preliminary findings. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(4), 363–377. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167297234003
BarghJ. A.McKennaK. Y. A.FitzsimonsG. M. (2002). Can you see the real me? Activation and expression of the “true self” on the internet. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 33–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00247
7.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
8.
BerscheidE.SnyderM.OmotoA. M. (1989). The relationship closeness inventory: Assessing the closeness of interpersonal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(5), 792–807. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.5.792
9.
BrussO. E.HillJ. M. (2010). Tell me more: Online versus face-to-face communication and self-disclosure. Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research, 15(1), 3–7. https://doi.org/10.24839/1089-4136.jn15.1.3
10.
BurgoonJ. K.BonitoJ. A.RamirezA.DunbarN. E.KamK.FischerJ. (2002). Testing the interactivity principle: Effects of mediation, propinquity, and verbal and nonverbal modalities in interpersonal interaction. Journal of Communication, 52(3), 657–677. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02567.x
11.
BurgoonJ. K.Le PoireB. A. (1999). Nonverbal cues and interpersonal judgments: Participants and observer perceptions of intimacy, dominance, composure, & formality. Communication Monographs, 66(2), 105–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759909376467
CoyleM. A.CarmichaelC. L. (2019). Perceived responsiveness in text messaging: The role of emoji use. Computers in Human Behavior, 99(2), 181–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.05.023
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA. G.BuchnerA. (2007). G* power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
GreeneK.DerlegaV. J.MathewsA. (2006). Self-disclosure in personal relationships. In VangelistiA.PerlmanD. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of personal relationships (pp. 409–427). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606632.023
19.
GroggelA. (2023). The power of a : Emojis reducing ambiguity in digitally mediated romantic encounters. Symbolic Interaction, 46(4), 440–472. https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.668
20.
HallJ. A. (2023). What we do in the shadows: The consumption of Mobile messaging by social media Mobile apps in the twilight of the social networking era. Mobile Media & Communication, 11(1), 66–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/20501579221133610
21.
JoinerA. N. (2001). Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: The role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(2), 177–192. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.36
22.
KashdanT. B.WenzelA. (2005). A transactional approach to social anxiety and the genesis of interpersonal closeness: Self, partner, and social context. Behavior Therapy, 36(4), 335–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7894(05)80115-7
23.
KashyD. A.SnyderD. K. (1995). Measurement and data analytic issues in couples research. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 338–348. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.338
24.
KatoY.AkahoriK. (2005). Analysis of judgment of partners’ emotions during e-mail and face-to-face communication. Journal of Science Education in Japan, 29(5), 354–365. https://doi.org/10.14935/jssej.29.354
25.
KayeL. K.WallH. J.MaloneS. A. (2016). “turn that frown upside down”: A contextual account of emoticon usage on different virtual platforms. Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 463–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.088
26.
KennyD. A.KashyD. A.CookW. L. (2020). Dyadic data analysis. Guilford Publications.
27.
KimJ.DindiaK. (2011). Online self-disclosure: A review of research. In WrightK. B.WebbL. M. (Eds.), Computer-mediated communication in personal relationships (pp. 156–180). Peter Lang Publishing.
28.
KroenckeL.HarariG. M.BackM. D.WagnerJ. (2023). Well-being in social interactions: Examining personality-situation dynamics in face-to-face and computer-mediated communication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 124(2), 437–460. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000422
29.
KrugerJ.EpleyN.ParkerJ.NgZ.-W. (2005). Egocentrism over e-mail: Can we communicate as well as we think?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 925–936. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.925
30.
LaurenceauJ.-P.BarrettL. F.PietromonacoP. R. (1998). Intimacy as an interpersonal process: The importance of self-disclosure, partner disclosure, and perceived partner responsiveness in interpersonal exchanges. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1238–1251. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1238
MallenM. J.DayS. X.GreenM. A. (2003). Online versus face-to-face conversations: An examination of relational and discourse variable. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 40(1–2), 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-3204.40.1/2.155
33.
McKennaK. Y. A.GreenA. S.GleasonM. E. (2002). Relationship formation on the internet: What’s the big attraction?Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 9–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00246
34.
MortonT. L. (1978). Intimacy and reciprocity of exchange: A comparison of spouses and strangers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(1), 72–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.36.1.72
OkdieB. M.GuadagnoR. E.BernieriF. J.GeersA. L.Mclarney-VesotskiA. R. (2011). Getting to know you: Face-to-face versus online interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 153–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.07.017
38.
ParkL. E.ManerJ. K. (2009). Does self-threat promote social connection? The role of self-esteem and contingencies of self-worth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(1), 203–217. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013933
39.
RamirezA.BurgoonJ. K. (2004). The effect of interactivity on initial interactions: The influence of information valence and modality and information richness on computer-mediated interaction. Communication Monographs, 71(4), 422–447. https://doi.org/10.1080/0363452042000307461
40.
R Core Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
41.
ReisH. T.ManiaciM. R.CaprarielloP. A.EastwickP. W.FinkelE. J. (2011). Familiarity does indeed promote attraction in live interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(3), 557–570. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022885
42.
ReisH. T.ShaverP. (1988). Intimacy as an interpersonal process. In DuckS. W. (Ed.), Handbook of personal relationships (pp. 367–389). Wiley.
43.
RosenfeldM. J.ThomasR. J.HausenS. (2019). Disintermediating your friends: How online dating in the United States displaces other ways of meeting. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(360), 17753–17758. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1908630116
44.
RuanS.WobbrockJ. O.LiouK.NgA.LandayJ. A. (2018). Comparing speech and keyboard text entry for short messages in two languages on touchscreen phones. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies, 1(4), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1145/3161187
45.
RuppelE. K.GrossC.StollA.PeckB. S.AllenM.KimS. Y. (2017). Reflecting on connecting: Meta-analysis of differences between computer-mediated and face-to-face self-disclosure. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22(1), 18–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12179
46.
SchoutenA. P.ValkenburgP. M.PeterJ. (2009). An experimental test of processes underlying self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 3(2), Article3. https://cyberpsychology.eu/article/view/4227
47.
ShawL. H. (2004). Liking and self-disclosure in computer-mediated and face-to-face interactions. University of California, Berkeley. HathiTrust. https://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.c3490386
48.
SheltonJ. N.TrailT.WestT. V.BergsiekerH. B. (2010). From strangers to friends: The interpersonal process model of intimacy in developing interracial friendships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27(1), 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407509346422
49.
SlatcherR. B.VazireS.PennebakerJ. W. (2008). Am “I” more important than “we”? Couples word use in instant messages. Personal Relationships, 15(4), 407–424. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2008.00207.x
50.
SprecherS. (2014). Initial interactions online-text, online-audio, online-video, or face-to-face: Effects of modality in liking, closeness, and other interpersonal outcomes. Computers in Human Behavior, 31(1), 190–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.029
51.
SprecherS. (2021a). Closeness and other affiliative outcomes generated from the fast friends procedure: A comparison with a small-talk task and unstructured self-disclosure and the moderating role of mode of communication. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 38(5), 1452–1471. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407521996055
52.
SprecherS. (2021b). Social bonding in initial acquaintances: Effects of modality and modality order. Social Psychology Quarterly, 84(3), 216–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/01902725211030252
53.
SprecherS.HamptonA. J. (2017). Liking and other reactions after a get-acquainted interaction: A comparison of continuous face-to-face interaction versus interaction that progresses from text messages to face-to-face. Communication Quarterly, 65(3), 333–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2016.1256334
54.
TidwellL. C.WaltherJ. B. (2006). Computer-mediated communication effects on disclosure, impressions, and interpersonal evaluations: Getting to know one another a bit at a time. Human Communication Research, 28(3), 317–348. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2002.tb00811.x
55.
WaltherJ. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19(1), 52–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365092019001003
56.
WaltherJ. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365096023001001
57.
WaltherJ. B. (2011). Theories of computer-mediated communication and interpersonal relations. In KnappM. L.DalyJ. A. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of interpersonal communication (4th ed., pp. 443–479). Sage.
58.
WelkerK. M.BakerL.PadillaA.HolmesH.AronA.SlatcherR. B. (2014). Effects of self-disclosure and responsiveness between couples on passionate love within couples. Personal Relationships, 21(4), 692–708. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12058
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
