Ambient intimacy on Twitter
Vol.10,No.1(2016)
Special issue: Online Self-disclosure and Privacy
Ambient intimacy; parasocial relationship; perceived closeness; self-disclosure; Twitter
Ruoyun Lin
Ana Levordashka
Sonja Utz
Altman, I., & Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships. Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Aron, A., Aron, E. N., & Smollan, D. (1992). Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 596–612. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.596
Auter, P. J., & Palmgreen, P. (2000). Development and validation of a parasocial interaction measure: The audience-persona interaction scale. Communication Research Reports, 17, 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824090009388753
Baruh, L., & Cemalcılar, Z. (2015). Rubbernecking effect of intimate information on Twitter: When getting attention works against interpersonal attraction. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18, 506–513. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0099
Bazarova, N. N. (2012). Public intimacy: Disclosure interpretation and social judgments on Facebook. Journal of Communication, 62, 815–832. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01664.x
Berscheid, E., Snyder, M., & Omoto, A. M. (1989). The Relationship Closeness Inventory: Assessing the closeness of interpersonal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 792–807. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.5.792
Brinker, S. (2009). Twitter and the law of propinquity. Retrieved from http://chiefmartec.com/2009/01/twitter-and-the-law-of-propinquity/
Buechel, E., & Berger, J. (2016). Motivations for consumer engagement with social media. In C. Dimofte, C. Haugtvedt, & R. Yalch (Eds.), Consumer Psychology in a social media world (p. 17). New York, NY: Routledge.
Chen, G. M. (2011). Tweet this: A uses and gratifications perspective on how active Twitter use gratifies a need to connect with others. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 755–762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.10.023
Collins, N. L., & Miller, L. C. (1994). Self-disclosure and liking: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 457–475. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.116.3.457
Cozby, P. C. (1972). Self-disclosure, reciprocity and liking. Sociometry, 35, 151–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2786555
Dibble, J. L., Hartmann, T., & Rosaen, S. F. (2016). Parasocial interaction and parasocial relationship: conceptual clarification and a critical assessment of easures. Human Communication Research, 42,21-44. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12063
Dibble, J. L., Levine, T. R., & Park, H. S. (2012). The Unidimensional Relationship Closeness Scale (URCS): Reliability and validity evidence for a new measure of relationship closeness. Psychological Assessment, 24, 565–572. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026265
Ellison, N. N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 1143–1168. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x
Festinger, L., Schachter, S., & Back, K. (1950). The spatial ecology of group formation. Social Pressure in Informal Groups, 141–161.
Frederick, E. L., Lim, C. H., Clavio, G., & Walsh, P. (2012). Why we follow: An examination of parasocial interaction and fan motivations for following athlete archetypes on Twitter. International Journal of Sport Communication, 5(2010), 481–502. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijsc.5.4.481
Grieve, R., Indian, M., Witteveen, K., Tolan, G. A., & Marrington, J. (2013). Face-to-face or Facebook: Can social connectedness be derived online? Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 604–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.11.017
Hartmann, T., & Goldhoorn, C. (2011). Horton and Wohl revisited: Exploring viewers’ experience of parasocial interaction. Journal of Communication, 61, 1104–1121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01595.x
Horton, D., & Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction; observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 19, 215–229. Retrieved from http://www.participations.org/volume 3/issue 1/3_01_hortonwohl.htm. https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1956.11023049
Johnson, P. R., & Yang, S.-U. (2009). Uses and gratifications of Twitter: An examination of user motives and satisfaction of Twitter use. In In Communication Technology Division of the annual convention of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication. Boston, MA.
Kaplan, A. M. (2012). If you love something, let it go mobile: Mobile marketing and mobile social media 4x4. Business Horizons, 55, 129–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2011.10.009
Kelly, R. (2009). Twitter Study - August 2009. Pear Analytics. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1361-3723(09)70038-7
Korzenny, F. (1978). A theory of electronic propinquity: Mediated communication in organizations. Communication Research, 5, 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365027800500101
Labrecque, L. I. (2014). Fostering consumer-brand relationships in Social Media environments: The role of parasocial interaction. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28, 134–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2013.12.003
Leonardi, P. M., & Meyer, S. R. (2015). Social media as social lubricant: How ambient awareness eases knowledge transfer. American Behavioral Scientist, 59, 10–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214540509
Levin, D. Z., & Cross, R. (2004). The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role of trust in effective knowledge transfer. Management Science, 50, 1477–1490. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1030.0136
Levordashka, A., Lin, R., & Utz, S. (2015). Ambient awareness: Interpersonal knowledge in online social networks. In International Communication Association.
Levordashka, A., & Utz, S. (2016). Ambient awareness: From random noise to digital closeness in online social networks. Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 147–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.037
Miller, V. (2008). New Media, Networking and Phatic Culture. Convergence, 14, 387–400. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856508094659
Nichols, A. L., & Webster, G. D. (2013). The single-item need to belong scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 189–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.02.018
Oppenheimer, D. M., Meyvis, T., & Davidenko, N. (2009). Instructional manipulation checks: Detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 867–872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.03.009
Perse, E. M., & Rubin, R. B. (1989). Attribution in social and parasocial relationships. Communication Research, 16, 59–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365089016001003
Rains, S. A., Brunner, S. R., & Oman, K. (2014). Self-disclosure and new communication technologies: The implications of receiving superficial self-disclosures from friends. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407514562561
Reichelt, L. (2007). Ambient Intimacy. Disambiguity. Retrieved from http://www.disambiguity.com/ambient-intimacy/
Riedl, C., Köbler, F., Goswami, S., & Krcmar, H. (2013). Tweeting to feel connected: A model for social connectedness in online Social Networks. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 29, 670–687. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2013.768137
Rubin, A. M., Perse, E. M., & Powell, R. a. (1985). Loneliness, parasocial interaction, and local television news viewing. Human Communication Research, 12, 155–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1985.tb00071.x
Rubin, R. B., & McHugh, M. P. (1987). Development of parasocial interaction relationships. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 31, 279–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838158709386664
Schramm, H., & Hartmann, T. (2008). The PSI-Process Scales. A new measure to assess the intensity and breadth of parasocial processes. Communications, 33, 385–402. https://doi.org/10.1515/COMM.2008.025
Spector, P. E., Van Katwyk, P. T., Brannick, M. T., & Chen, P. Y. (1997). When two factors don’t reflect two constructs: How item characteristics can produce artifactual factors. Journal of Management, 23, 659–677. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639702300503
Sprecher, S., Treger, S., & Wondra, J. D. (2012). Effects of self-disclosure role on liking, closeness, and other impressions in get-acquainted interactions. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407512459033
Thompson, C. (2008). Brave new world of digital intimacy. New York Times, 1–9. Retrieved from http://individual.utoronto.ca/kreemy/proposal/07.pdf
Treger, S., Sprecher, S., & Erber, R. (2013). Laughing and liking: Exploring the interpersonal effects of humor use in initial social interactions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 532-543. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1962
Tuchakinsky, R. (2010). Para-romantic love and para-friendships: Development and assessment of a multiple parasocial relationships scale. American Journal of Media Psychology, 3, 73–94.
Utz, S. (2015a). Is LinkedIn making you more successful? The informational benefits derived from public social media. New Media & Society . Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815604143
Utz, S. (2015b). The function of self-disclosure on social network sites: Not only intimate, but also positive and entertaining self-disclosures increase the feeling of connection. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.076
Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(2p2), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0025848
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright © 2016 Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace