Texting Phenomena

Inter individual(prenominal) intercourse is vital to humans and is expendd in day-by-day situations. Intersomebodyal conversation refers to face to face chat surrounded by state (35), harmonize to West and Turner (2007), occasions of Introducing confabulation Theories. West and Turner explain that exploring how relationships lay down, the upholding and subsequence of these relationships, and the end of relationships, argon the main characteristics of inter personal con school school school textual matter.Interpersonal communion began as face-to-face chat between two pile, and as technology advanced, it expand to include unseasoned communicative technologies such as tele promise c onlys, email, winking pass along, chats, kindly media networks, and text pass on. textual matter sink through cells phones, also cognise as texting or SMS (Short Message Service), is a form of interpersonal dialogue that cigaret be repre displaceed through the Linear Model of Communication A message is sent from a witness to a pass receiver through a channel, which whitethorn be interrupted by around form of noise.texts atomic number 18 person-to-person messages received from and sent to known individuals. Text electronic messaging provides a one-to-one, personalized, and individuating hearty medium (Reid and Reid, 2007). The phenomena of text messaging, has researchers and scholars questioning whether this uprise communication technology adds or takes away from interpersonal communication and hatfuls learned communication skills. Review of Literature Texting as a New Phenomenon of Communication E rattlingday amicable arrangements and interpersonal contact atomic number 18 now routinely affected by mobile technology (Conti-Ramsden, Durkin, and Simkin, 2010).As distant to 15 years ago, todays youth adopt a greater variety of options to choose from when communicating with their peers. Communication, via cell phone and the internet, be now wi dely available and very popular with the young (Conti-Ramsden, Durkin, and Simkin, 2010, 197). The globose cell phone market now stands at nearlywhat 1. 8 billion subscribers, and is estimated to reach 3 billion by the end of 2010, by which time nearly half of either human beings on the orbiter atomic number 18 expected to own and disunite a cell phone (Reid and Reid, 2007).A recent survey of 2,000 adolescentagers in the United States revealed that 80% of teens, or approximately 17 million young commonwealth, have a cell phone. 96% of those teens use the texting function, and of that 96%, 1 out of 10 teens say that they text for 45 minutes a day (Conti-Ramsden, Durkin, and Simkin, 2010). Over 900 billion messages were sent in 2005, with expectations that this ordain rise to more than two trillion messages in 2010 (Deumert and Masinyana, 2008). Text messaging has be ascend a third estate room of retentivity in ceaseless touch with peers, especially among young hoi pol loi all over the world.The phenomenon of texting is continuing to increase, raising substantial awareness of the new texting language. Researchers are proposing to treat electronic communication as a distinct mood of intermediate communication, in between the oral and the compose medium (Fandrych, 2007). agree to Ingrid Fandrych (2007), author of Electronic Communication and Technical Terminology, Online conversation takes place on the written level, composition victimisation specific stylistic conventions which are very similar to oral communication, especially abbreviations of frequently used phrases and emoticons to replace s blushth cranial nerve ex tweetions (148).Fandrych (2007) claims that acronyms, blends, and clippings are responsible for the characteristic style of Internet English, and that offline usage is more and more influenced by Internet usage (148). Some new and creative enounce formations have even nominate their way into everyday usage including the acro nyms btw (by the way) and ttyl (talk to you later), as well as the blending of certain words like all right into alright. Fandrych (2007) predicts some changes in general (off-line) English collect to texting language as well (151). flock talk via text messages using the keyboard, they elucidate use of abbreviations, they omit non-content words, and they do not capitalize. Fandrych (2007) explains that Electronic interlocutors replace linguistic contextual cues which would have been present in face-to-face communication with abbreviations and emoticons, which are, of course, consciously use and sometimes intended to entertain, a feature which internet English shares with opposite jargons and in-group registers (151).Electronic communication, as a medium, shares characteristics with the written language and the oral language. Letters and symbols are used through typing which are displayed on a screen, only when at the same time, it is very informal and conversational which repl aces the linguistic context with special cues that do not exist in the traditional written mode (Fandrych, 2007, 151). Text language is neither identical to speech nor writing, scarcely adaptively features characteristics of twain.Fandrych (2007) titles this electronic communication language as Netspeak, and categorizes it as a poop medium alongside written, speak, and sign language (152). Communication through text is informal and characterized by new elements. Fandrych (2007) concludes that the electronic medium female genital organ be considered to constitute a separate level, between the spoken and the written modes and overlapping, to some extent, with two of them (152).The new texting phenomenon not only creates a new form of language between oral and written mediums, but it also acquires a globalized texting standard. English language texts produced by bilingual speakers share many an otherwise(prenominal) of the features which have been reported for English SMS commu nication internationally, and provide evidence for what one force call a global English SMS standard (Deumert and Masinyana, 2008). English messages are strongly represented in all communicative functions of text messaging by bilingual individuals.Deumert and Masinyana (2008), co-authors of, The use of English and isiXhosa in text messages (SMS), piece of work how English is combined with isiXhosa, one of the official languages of South Africa, in text messages between native South Afri arseholes. Deumert and Masinyana state that The historical and continuing dominance of English on the world-wide-web has supported the popular belief that the language of electronic communication in general is English, and in some cases, English piece of ass replace a users first language in this medium (123).In studies focusing on bilingual texting, most messages were written in English combined with the local language. Researchers concluded that in that location is the existence of a global En glish SMS norm because of brevity and speed, paralinguistic bulwarks with the medium and local language, and the restriction of texting characters (Deumert and Masinyana, 2008). The phenomenon of texting has transformed individuals lives by creating the possibility of being in constant communication at all times, as well as creating a tendency towards cross-cultural homogeny.Texting as a Negative material be of Communication Although texting provides the opportunity for constant and flying contact with others, it tends to have a displacing effect on face-to-face communication. Similar to face-to-face communication, texting allows for conversational turn-taking, but excludes intonations, emotions, and the ability to send long messages. Llana Gershon (2008), author of, Email my Heart therapeutic and Romantic Break-Ups, performed a study looking at how Ameri rotters are experiencing and using new technologies to end relationships.Gershon (2008) discusses, through the use of Americ an college students break-up narratives, the ways in which certain affable media create new possibilities for disconnecting with others (15). Although a break-up may be happening, an individual has the opportunity through text messaging to hold separate or multiple conversations simultaneously with the break-up. This takes away from the personal aspect of intimate relationships and tends to enforce the displacement of face-to-face communication.Teens especially use insistent messaging and texting in particular as substitutes for face-to-face communication with people from their physical lives, therefore, feeling less psychologically faithful to their instant messaging and texting partners (Subrahmanyam and Greenfield, 2008). This may also damage the emotional quality of a relationship. Online interactions lack essential features of face-to-face communication, such as gestures, eye contact, and body language, making them less rich than offline interactions (Subrahmanyam and Green field, 2008).Although texting is still communication, social anxiety and anti-social behaviors can be an effect of the lack face-to-face communication with teens today. Reports in the press and surveys from parents find points of view that range from exuberant, discussing how socially-interactive technologies can save youth from social isolation and depression, to alarming, focusing on how constant use of these technologies fosters anti-social behavior (Bryant, Sanders-Jackson, and Smallwood, 2006, 557).The worldly carry on is that texting and other forms of social technology lie between these two extremes. A recent survey revealed that cell phone owners declaring a generalized election for texting on their cell phones were both lonelier and more anxious than those who preferred talking (Reid and Reid, 2007). People who have social anxiety will not come to terms with their fears without experiencing face-to-face communication and, as an effect, use texting as a divergent, to kill time or avoid some other activity.Texting allows users to unloose from the demands of immediate interactive involvement, releasing time and attentional resources to compose and trim down messages (Reid and Reid, 2007). Although texting may be an outlet and a preferred mode of communication for people with anxiety problems, it also may give others a mendacious sense of the persons real personality. Along with peers, there is a growing concern that adolescents extensive use of electronic communication to interact with their peers may cross their relations with their parents, siblings, and other family members (Subrahmanyam and Greenfield, 2008).Subrahmanyam and Greenfield (2008) show how peer relationships are being heighten at the expense of family relationships in an example role of technology in mod family life When the working spouse, usually the father, came through the door at the end of the day, the other spouse and children were often so absorbed in what they were doing that they greeted him only about one-third of the time, usually with an obligatory hi. About half the time, children ignored him and continued multitasking and monitoring their various electronic gadgets (135).Parents are having a much harder time breaking into their childrens world because of the distance and silence established through text messaging. Teens are using cell phones to launch generational boundaries, such as screening calls from parents into voicemail, as well as undermining family rituals, such as mealtimes and vacations (Subrahmanyam and Greenfield, 2008). Cell phones give adolescents the power to control the people with whom they talk and have more room into which they can share thoughts freely and privately from their family members.The landmarks of the electronic transformation stage include greater teen autonomy, the decline of face-to-face communication, enhancement of peer group relations at the workable expense of family relations, and greater teen choi ce (Subrahmanyam and Greenfield, 2008). According to Raymond Williams (1997), author of Mobile Privatization, new technologies only serve to further aggravate the late human condition of mobile privatized social relations (129). This seems to be a concern that is provoked further by new mobile communication technologies with people talking of detached presence (Lin and Tong, 2007). Adolescents constant use of mobile communication can be seen as a symptom of a general loss of human connectivity in the modern condition (Lin and Tong, 2007, 305). Texting as a Positive Form of Communication Although many studies have shown the negative effects of text messaging, other research has shown that this new form of communication has positive aspects as well. Text messaging is a form of communication that has many uses coordinating plans, multi-tasking, friendship maintenance, information, and amorous relationships. Text messages are convenient, immediate, less disturbing, and have no constra ints.Since there are so many communicative functions, text messaging has become a common means of keeping in constant touch, especially among young people in many parts of the world today (Lin and Tong, 2007). Todays youth use text messaging especially to keep in touch and maintain either close or distant relationships. late(a) research studies have explored how text messaging can offer a sense of intimacy between friends as well as between strangers. This is especially appealing to youth because they can be bonded to all of their social networks through one device. The virtual presence (or absent presence) of persons elsewhere through mobile communication facilitates networking, deeper relationships, or simply increased contact. People who are physically far away can be brought into immediate cyber presence (Lin and Tong, 2007, 305). Mobile texting allows people to be in constant social contact, which therefore gives them a sense of co-presence at all times. Lin and Tong (2007) exp lain that text messaging has created new kinds of modalities for co-presence and communication, which contributes to a sense of virtual intimacy (305).Text messages, quite an than standard telephone calls, allow for total individual communication there is no chance of anyone overhearing the conversation and thus supports a sense of credentials and privacy. It is appealing because the text is expected to reach a specific person directly, no matter where they are or the time of day. This form of communication is very popular between adolescents and their peers because they feel as if they can sink privately, not under the supervision of their parents.Teens travel between their homes, school and near places that are all under a high degree of polity by adults. Mobile text messaging has thus fulfilled an important function which provides a sense of co-presence for young people who lack the means to share some private physical space free from adults charge (Lin and Tong, 2007, 306 ). Because this form of communication is relatively free from adult supervision, teens often use texting to maintain romantic relationships as well as friendships.A study found that texting is used to negotiate gender relations, especially among couples (Lin and Tong, 2007). For instance, after a fight, couples may not want to directly speak to each other or hear ones voice, but texting avoids the embarrassment of making romantic advances or even when saying no to these advances. The informants of the study also verbalised the fact that some messages are highly private and very meaningful, which can be saved and stored in the mobile device.Since the conversation remains private, even in public location ns, individuals tend to reveal more about their emotional selves through texts. Thus, youth text messaging end on an optimistic note about the positive uses of SMS by young people for gaining freedom from surveillance by adults and for negotiating subtle gender relations (Lin and Ton g, 2007). Relationships can actually be strengthened through text messaging because of its convenience, intimacy, and privacy among users. Another strength of text messaging is that it allows people to keep in touch with friends who are isolated by physical boundaries.Although other forms of communication such as telephone, email, and written letters allow people separated by distance to keep in touch as well, texting allows both sender and receiver to keep in contact at both of their conveniences. The message is sent and received immediately regardless if the other person is online. It allows for multi-tasking while holding other conversations or tasks, and also is less disturbing, by far, than other forms of communication such as phone calls or face-to-face communication.While people may interact frequently in person with people who are in their lives every day, it may not be possible to meet other friends, family, or acquaintances face-to-face on a repair basis. To fill in-pers on communication gaps, people used text messaging to stay connected and make plans to meet when convenient (Quan-Haase, 2007). Text messaging is a more suitable fit to maintaining distance relationships as unconnected to other forms of communication.Aside from convenience, some people actually prefer text messaging because it gives them a chance to sound off about what they want to say, which is not eternally possible during face-to-face communication. Text messaging gives people time to think about the wording of their messages, allowing them to be more informal and candid, even with close friends (Reid and Reid, 2007, 425). Some people, due to SMS and other forms of text base communication, even develop an entirely separate, brave SMS self, which contrasts with their more reserved real-life personality (Reid and Reid, 2007).Text messaging can be used as an outlet to help expand communication and closeness with peers. For instance, in an essay that discusses the relationship be tween texting and social anxiety, Donna Reid and Fraser Reid (2007) draw up By delaying or eliminating the audience reactions that normally accompany real-time spoken interaction, SMS may offer anxious individuals a way of making social contact without fear of immediate disapproval or rejection, allowing attention to be refocused away from the observers perspective and towards the composition of messages that more efficaciously pass self-presentational goals (425).Interactive media, such as texting, allow people to individuate themselves, communicate with peers, and accomplish stages of intimate contact that they could not achieve in other interactional settings. Research Questions Texting helps maintain social relationships in modern society, and affords resources to achieve a sense of co-presence and intimacy with both existing friends and new acquaintances, while avoiding having to deal with face-to-face interaction or the intrusive disturbance of a phone call (Lin and Tong, 2 007).Although texting may be a convenient source of communication that is direct, individualized, and private, it also may be taking away from the enormousness of face-to-face, interpersonal communication. If people are relying on a text based communication exchange, they are not experiencing or learning interactional conversations involving bracing inflection, reactions, and especially body language. Nonverbal communication is a big part of interpersonal communication because it shows the reaction of the individual after receiving the message, therefore bighearted the sender a form of feedback that strengthens the communication process.As technology continues to advance, there is rising concern that social, interactional, and communication skills of todays youth and future generations will consequently decline. As a result, this study will address the future(a) questions RQ1 Is texting taking away from or adding to interpersonal communication and individuals learned communicati on skills? RQ2 Will texting affect how children and adolescents communicate with one some other? RQ3 Do people rely on texting to fulfill their emotional, psychological, and other forms of require as opposed to other types of communicative technology or face-to-face communication?