Fire Extinguisher
By Stephen Leahy
"Don't work too hard," wrote a colleague in an e-mail today. Was she sincere or sarcastic? I think I know (sarcastic), but I'm probably wrong.
According to recent research published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, I've only a 50-50 chance of ascertaining the tone of any e-mail message. The study also shows that people think they've correctly interpreted the tone of e-mails they receive 90 percent of the time.
"That's how flame wars get started," says psychologist Nicholas Epley of the University of Chicago, who conducted the research with Justin Kruger of New York University. "People in our study were convinced they've accurately understood the tone of an e-mail message when in fact their odds are no better than chance," says Epley.
The researchers took 30 pairs of undergraduate students and gave each one a list of 20 statements about topics like campus food or the weather. Assuming either a serious or sarcastic tone, one member of each pair e-mailed the statements to his or her partner. The partners then guessed the intended tone and indicated how confident they were in their answers.
Those who sent the messages predicted that nearly 80 percent of the time their partners would correctly interpret the tone. In fact the recipients got it right just over 50 percent of the time. "People often think the tone or emotion in their messages is obvious because they 'hear' the tone they intend in their head as they write," Epley explains.
At the same time, those reading messages unconsciously interpret them based on their current mood, stereotypes and expectations. Despite this, the research subjects thought they accurately interpreted the messages nine out of 10 times.
The reason for this is egocentrism, or the difficulty some people have detaching themselves from their own perspective, says Epley. In other words, people aren't that good at imagining how a message might be understood from another person's perspective.
"E-mail is very easy to misinterpret, which not only triggers flame wars but lots of litigation," says Nancy Flynn, executive director of the e-Policy Institute and author of guidebooks E-Mail Rules and Instant Messaging Rules. Many companies battle workplace lawsuits triggered by employee e-mail, according to Flynn.
People write absolutely, incredibly stupid things in company e-mails," said Flynn.
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,70179-0.html?tw=wn_index_2
"Don't work too hard," wrote a colleague in an e-mail today. Was she sincere or sarcastic? I think I know (sarcastic), but I'm probably wrong.
According to recent research published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, I've only a 50-50 chance of ascertaining the tone of any e-mail message. The study also shows that people think they've correctly interpreted the tone of e-mails they receive 90 percent of the time.
"That's how flame wars get started," says psychologist Nicholas Epley of the University of Chicago, who conducted the research with Justin Kruger of New York University. "People in our study were convinced they've accurately understood the tone of an e-mail message when in fact their odds are no better than chance," says Epley.
The researchers took 30 pairs of undergraduate students and gave each one a list of 20 statements about topics like campus food or the weather. Assuming either a serious or sarcastic tone, one member of each pair e-mailed the statements to his or her partner. The partners then guessed the intended tone and indicated how confident they were in their answers.
Those who sent the messages predicted that nearly 80 percent of the time their partners would correctly interpret the tone. In fact the recipients got it right just over 50 percent of the time. "People often think the tone or emotion in their messages is obvious because they 'hear' the tone they intend in their head as they write," Epley explains.
At the same time, those reading messages unconsciously interpret them based on their current mood, stereotypes and expectations. Despite this, the research subjects thought they accurately interpreted the messages nine out of 10 times.
The reason for this is egocentrism, or the difficulty some people have detaching themselves from their own perspective, says Epley. In other words, people aren't that good at imagining how a message might be understood from another person's perspective.
"E-mail is very easy to misinterpret, which not only triggers flame wars but lots of litigation," says Nancy Flynn, executive director of the e-Policy Institute and author of guidebooks E-Mail Rules and Instant Messaging Rules. Many companies battle workplace lawsuits triggered by employee e-mail, according to Flynn.
People write absolutely, incredibly stupid things in company e-mails," said Flynn.
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,70179-0.html?tw=wn_index_2
6 Comments:
I found a good quote on the value of face-to-face conversation versus emails from an unlikely source: an English Football mangager. See
http://unclecrabbysjournal.blogspot.com/2006/02/miscelaney-knowledge-transfer-advice.html
Yep. Reminds me about the time my husband told me that some of his colleagues were e-mailing each other for 99% of all communications even thought they were sitting side by side in the cube farm. Perhaps their IT degree programs hadn't really stressed cultivation of the human touch. Or maybe they were so paranoid they fell into the habit of establishing C.Y.A. trails even with their closest colleagues. Both ideas gave me a good chuckle, but I'm very grateful I don't work in an environment like that...
I'm trying to imagine how Dr. Samuel Johnson and James Boswell would communicatein an electronic enviroment. Would they have to be oh so careful to use emoticons and message tags so an not to ofend each others sensibilities?
Johnson:[trash talk] Oats: a grain used to feed horses in England, and men in Scotland[/trash talk]
Boswell: [snap] Aye! Such men and such horses![/snap]
For those of you blundered in on this message, yes I am engaging in mild sarcasm and exageration.
paradise -
Well, I was riffing on fargo don's football manager advice to "get up off your arse sometimes"...obviously, your approach seems to be the sensible one for most people. I don't think my husbands colleagues were establishing audit trails - I think that their rather paltry baseline social skills may have experienced an accelerated devolution due to the over-reliance on e-mail for everything...circles within circles within circles...
Cube farms can do that to a person...
Don't get me wrong though. I love email. Write to me anytime...rogersparkreview@hotmail.com
Now there's an interesting design challenge: a set of custom emoticons for Dr. Johnson...
agent 99-
i know i've been misunderstood and have myself misunderstood someones intention via e mail. most of think of it as a quickie method of contact, but it usually isn't perceived that way for the person receiving your e mail.
time of day and moods have a lot to do with how we interpret these messages.
blog writing and commenting are no different.
My point precisely Max.
Post a Comment
<< Home