Dear all I'm going to do a literature review on synchronous CMC research that takes a rhetorical or discourse analysis approach. If you happen to come across any relevant articles/resources, please advise. Thank you. Shufang Shi shishufa@msu.edu.
As I'm sure others will note, there's a problem with the notion of synchronous CMC. All CMC systems have some kind of lag built into them. --Christian Nelson shufang wrote:
I'm going to do a literature review on synchronous CMC research that takes a rhetorical or discourse analysis approach.
Though some of you interested in internet research methods/results might find this amusing. http://www.space.com/searchforlife/seti_hostiles_020221.html And further conflations of the imaginary and the real� http://www.click2houston.com/hou/news/stories/news-124836820020222-130220.ht... __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games http://sports.yahoo.com
Christian Nelson wrote:
As I'm sure others will note, there's a problem with the notion of synchronous CMC. All CMC systems have some kind of lag built into them.
I should say "All CMC systems that are widely available at present . . . ." Of course, with the advent of things like Internet 2 the possibility of simultaneous vocal and/or visual communication may well be possible. --Christian
Christian, Sure, but one can concede that users can socially construct systems such as instant messaging as synchronous. It is an issue of whether we're using technocentric definitions of systems or usercentric definitions of them. Joao PhD Student MIT / Sloan At 02:16 PM 2/25/2002 -0500, you wrote:
Christian Nelson wrote:
As I'm sure others will note, there's a problem with the notion of synchronous CMC. All CMC systems have some kind of lag built into them.
I should say "All CMC systems that are widely available at present . . . ." Of course, with the advent of things like Internet 2 the possibility of simultaneous vocal and/or visual communication may well be possible. --Christian
_______________________________________________ Air-l mailing list Air-l@aoir.org http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l
Joao Vieira da Cunha wrote:
Christian,
Sure, but one can concede that users can socially construct systems such as instant messaging as synchronous. It is an issue of whether we're using technocentric definitions of systems or usercentric definitions of them.
Very true. I was only thinking of the definition of _synchronous_ from a "techy" perspective. In this case, I don't feel bad about privileging that perspective, as those who construct technologically asynchronous systems as though they were synchronous are constructing away/deconstructing while presumably operating with the same notions of synchrony as techy persons do. I think. --Christian
Sure, but one can concede that users can socially construct systems such as instant messaging as synchronous. It is an issue of whether we're using technocentric definitions of systems or usercentric definitions of them.
Joao PhD Student MIT / Sloan
i agree with you joao, denise D.M.CARTER DOCTORAL STUDENT CASS UNIVERSITY OF HULL EMAIL: d.m.carter@cas.hull.ac.uk OR: denisecarter@denisecarter.net
isn't there lag in any and every system of communication? vocality has lag, between when it is voiced and heard. Signs have lag between when it is presented and it is seen. In fact all forms of communication have lag of some sort, the question for me is not that it exists, but where the lag originates; the categories of the lag that we use to analyze it, what they are similar to, and different from. If lag comes from a an intermediate processor that is like a person pausing to think before they speak. If it comes from the network that is like voice through air. If it comes from our machine, then it is like us interpretting a new language while we are thinking of other things. There are corellates between human and machinic in the case of lag. Arguably this might be due to the time and its ontological construction. Time is the human category that we bring to the table and build into machines. Taking the machinic(technocentric) vs the humanist(usercentric) perspectives, I suspect in the end will do no significant work here. I may be wrong. The definition should be stable across systems, but the systems may change. rhus we have something where lag is present and synchronous/assynchronous might end up meaning different things in this construction. For instance, in synchronous, I assume a certain concurrent presence between every person and their interface based on proximity to that machine and the apparent immediacy of response, like irc. Assynchronous assumes that there need not be a proximal or immediate concurrent presence between every person and the interface. Denise Carter wrote:
Sure, but one can concede that users can socially construct systems such
as
instant messaging as synchronous. It is an issue of whether we're using technocentric definitions of systems or usercentric definitions of them.
Joao PhD Student MIT / Sloan
i agree with you joao, denise
D.M.CARTER DOCTORAL STUDENT CASS UNIVERSITY OF HULL EMAIL: d.m.carter@cas.hull.ac.uk OR: denisecarter@denisecarter.net
_______________________________________________ Air-l mailing list Air-l@aoir.org http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l
-- jeremy hunsinger http://www.cddc.vt.edu/jeremy cddc/political science http://www.cddc.vt.edu 526 major williams hall 0130 http://www.dromocracy.com virginia tech -under construction blacksburg, va 24061 540-231-7614 this email was sent from my office
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . till we *) . . . Hi, I know that I'm replying somehow late, but confronted with this problem in my masters thesis (about a virtual party convention), I decided to differentiate between not asynchronous and synchronous CMC, but between different (social, normative) 'speeds' of CMC. So a not only technically, but also socially asynchronous web page embedded discussion group is slower than an e-mail conversation is slower than a fast chat, where everybody is expecting you to answer the same minute. Or in other words: ignoring the technical principal asynchronousness of CMC, there are more synchron kinds of CMC and less synchron kinds. Together this leads to an social agreed upon normal answer expectancy time, and to some kind of shared attention focus or horizon. Best regards, Till Westermayer, M.A.
As I'm sure others will note, there's a problem with the notion of synchronous CMC. All CMC systems have some kind of lag built into them. --Christian Nelson
shufang wrote:
I'm going to do a literature review on synchronous CMC research that takes a rhetorical or discourse analysis approach.
__ . / / / / ... Till Westermayer - till we *) . . . mailto:till@tillwe.de http://www.westermayer.de/till/index.htm . Habsburgerstr. 82 . 79104 Freiburg . 0761 55697152 . 0170 9554960 . . . . .
participants (7)
-
Christian Nelson -
Denise Carter -
J. M. B. -
jeremy hunsinger -
Joao Vieira da Cunha -
shufang -
till＠tillwe.de