The authors argue that the Internet has been considered to have a 'monolitic' feature in previous research works. They point out that that is the reason that the previous Internet studies (in relation to "social interactions") have resulted in varius 'conflict' findings. They suggest that there might be many aspects of internet uses:

• getting touch with friends living far away
  
• getting touch with friends whom one can meet in everyday life (face to face)
  
• arranging appointment
  
• specific information seeking
  
• news reading or watching
  
• publicizing (blog, etc.)
  
• shopping
  
• banking
  
• listening to music
  
• viewing pornographics
  
  

Different findings:

• Heavy internet use = negative social activites such as less interaction with friends and family members (Nie and Erbring, 2000; Nie et al., 2002)
  
• Inernet use = reinforcement of social activities (Kraut et al., 2002)
  
• experienced users = spending less tme with others than new users (UCLA, 2000)
  
• internet users = vising friends and family, volunteering works, spending time in clubs (Pew project, 2000)
  
• internet users = 3 times more time attending social events, more conversations (Robinson et al., 2002)
  
  

Why? Baym et at. (2004) point the conflation of internet use into one category (that says, internet use).

Questions: what are the relations between this argu and (time assignment in media use)?

1. what kinds of internet media students are using for significant social interactions?
   
   • Internet media that were used in their 'significant voluntary social interaction' included email (72.79%), chatting (19.85%), and instant messaging (7.35%). It is interesting that the participants did not list any of "OLD internet media" such as usenet newsgroups, MUDs, role-playing gaems, etc.
     
2. comparison of frequencies of significant voluntary social interactions in the internet and other media channels such as telephone and face-to-face
   
   • face-to-face > telephone > internet
     
3. What kinds of internet media do they use for their significant social interactions?
   
   • all three media were used in their social interactions
     
   • Table 1. Number of media used (p.306)
     

MEDIA USE	N
Only face-to-face	1
Only telephone	0
Only Internet	1
Face-to-face and telephone	12
Face-to-face and internet	4
Telephone and telephone	1
Face-to-face, telephone, and internet	32
total	51

• So, they say "This suggests that much of the significant social interaction that these students reported having online was conducted very likely in multimedia (rather than 'online') relationships.
  
  

Local social circle: 'the number of people, including relatives and freinds, in the same town iwth whom you eep in touch at least once a month (Kraut et al., 1998: 1021)'
Distance social circle: 'the approximate number of people, including relatives, work colleagues, and personal friends, outside of the town name area whom you keep in touch with at least once a year'

4. How many relationships are maintained in the internet?
   
   • On average, 36.77 people in local and long distance social circles
     
5. Relative percentage maintainance of social relationships (at least in part) via internet use; telephone, face-to-face, and email?
   
6. use of communication to maintain relationship might differ in terms of distance: local, long distance | close local, close long distance
   
   • table 2
     

	Face-TO-FACE	TELEPHONE	INTERNET	MAIL
Local social circle	73.49	49.32	35.07	5.70
Distant social circle	41.55	49.61	48.99	13.94
Close local social circle	79.33	57.15	35.66	6.74
Close distant social circle	50.23	56.57	49.77	15.90

Note: signle relationships are often maintained through multiple media, creating overlap inthe columns. Therefore, rows do not toal 100%.

7. for a social circle, internet use might correlate with the use of other media.
   
8. Are media used in different amounts depending on the purpose of the interaction (social vs. non-social?)
   

Qs. What do they mean by significant social interactions?

Answers: Previous studies tend to treat internet use as engagement of "unreal" world. But, they argue it is not the case anymore. Signficant others are communicate via various media including the internet. So, the researchers asked students to identify themself what is the significant social interactions, which they called 'significant voluntary social interaction' (p. 305).

9. How do the physicla contexts (localtion: local vs. long distance; presence of others, and engagement in other activites) of online interactions differ from those in other media (face-to-face, telephone calls)?
   
10. Does the perceived quality of interaction depend on medium (channels: face-to-face, internet, telephones), relationship (romantic partner, friend, family member, and acquaintances), purpose (social/non-social), or interactions amonges these variables?
    

CategoryJournalAritcles
CategoryJournalNewMediaAndSociety
CategoryResearchMethods