My research topic is to see how social media negatively affects face to face communication. Since this topic is very controversial. What we mainly ask people is why they either prefer and/or use a certain method of communication. We ask them that because then they are explaining to us why that method is the most comfortable, foreshadowing what the other method they didn’t choose doesn’t allow them to feel. An interesting story that surfaced is when I was doing an interview the participant talked about how they use social media, snapchat and texting, all the time. But only because that is the most efficient way to them. They felt like they have time to think and they aren’t pressured, and they have time to think and not have to respond right away. Another interesting interview was someone who also used the same methods texting, snapchat, and calling. But they also preferred letters or even a carrier pigeon. The participant explains how it will make a person want to get their most valuable points across and not waste any time between the two of them because this mode of communication isn’t as fast. So, our project is going well in general because we are getting a variety of reasons and explanations that will allow us to answer some questions.
The project is going as planned we feel like, and I feel like, because it is accumulating a widespread of answers for us. It is I feel like as we go on now we must analyze our responses even more to get to what we think is the main reason for each subject or a specific group. It will make our answer to the question more reliable and confirming because it is based off the people. I think bottom line we will successfully distinguish a few reasons why social media is indeed ruining face to face communication.
It’s interesting that in a society of instant-gratification , we want to use technology to interact in a distant and less instant way (ex: people liking time to think before they respond to a text vs having to respond right away in a face to face conversation)