Free2Thee.com

Archive for the ‘Communication’ Category

People with low self-esteem post more negative updates, which makes them less likeable. On the surface, Facebook would seem to offer important benefits to people who have low self-esteem. Sharing is easy and feels safe on Facebook, and sharing is an important way to improve friendships. Having a stable network of social connections helps to improve self-esteem. In reality, though, it may not work out that way. A new study conducted by Amanda Forest and Joanne Wood of the University of Waterloo found that people with low self-esteem tend to post too many negative updates, causing friends to see them as less likeable. The study will be published in the journal Psychological Science . Initially, the researchers, who have a special focus on self-esteem and how it impacts which emotions people express, thought that Facebook would be an ideal venue for people to go to learn social skills and improve friendships. People who have lower self-esteem typically find it hard to share their feelings in a one-on-one setting. However, Facebook allows users to share and have social interactions without the need for face-to-face contact. The researchers found that participants with low self-esteem often view Facebook as a chance to connect and interact with others in a safe setting without the awkwardness they often feel in live, in-person social settings. Participants were also asked to provide the ten most recent updates about their life that they posted for their Facebook friends to see. The updates were rated for negativity, then an undergraduate research assistant went through the updates and indicated how likeable they found the person who made the statements from the updates. Participants who had low self-esteem tended to post updates that were more negative on average. In turn, the assistants who rated their updates tended to find them less likeable than people with higher self-esteem. Although the raters did not know the people who posted the updates, according to Forest, a previous study showed that almost half of the friends people list on Facebook are strangers or mere acquaintances, rather than close friends. The study found that when participants with low self-esteem placed very positive messages on their pages, they received more responses from members of their actual Facebook friends list than they did when they placed negative or neutral messages on Facebook. However, participants who had high self-esteem got more responses from their friends when they posted negative messages. Forest and Wood speculate that this may be because, in both cases, these types of posts are more unusual for these users. The investigators concluded that, while people who have low self-esteem may be more willing to share on Facebook, they might not receive the same benefits from doing so that they would get from face-to-face encounters. This is because people may not be as willing to provide feedback on Facebook the way they might in person. According to Forest, in a live social setting, people may be able to pick up on a friend’s negative reaction to to something they said. “On Facebook, you don’t see most of the reactions.” Related posts: Facebook positively influences education, study says Facebook’s Effect on Interpersonal Relationships [Infographic] Almost Half of Facebook Users Have Profanity on Their Wall

Go here to see the original:
Don’t Use Facebook If You Have Low Self-Esteem [Study]

Public relations personnel are charged with managing the way organizational crises are perceived by the public, but they are also responsible for encouraging a public response that benefits both the organization involved and the people and things impacted by the crisis. Recent research published in the journal Communications Research shows that the way the news of a disaster or tragedy is framed during initial media coverage has a strong impact on the way the public responds to the organization at the center of the crisis. Researchers led by Glen Cameron of the University of Missouri showed participants two different news stories covering the same crisis. Some participants were given an article that took an “anger-frame” perspective, blaming the organization involved for the situation. A second group received an article that took a “sadness-frame” point-of-view, focusing on the victims and the negative impact on them of the crisis. Participants who were shown the “anger-frame” story tended to skim over the information and to come away with more negative attitudes toward the organization than the ones who saw the “sadness-frame” article. Not only were their emotions influenced by the news slant used, but their information processing patterns were influenced as well, with “anger-frame” readers less likely to evaluate the information carefully and draw their own conclusions and quicker to join the article’s author in condemning the company involved. The researchers also examined how the corporate response to a crisis affects public perception of the organization. They found that an official response that focuses on relief efforts and the welfare of victims led to an improved image of the corporation in the minds of the public. However, messages that focused on promises of justice sought to distance the company from culpability based upon legal principles had the opposite effect. These results held true regardless of whether people received their first account of the news in an anger- or sadness-framed presentation. According to Cameron, the results show the importance of taking quick control of the message when a crisis occurs. Putting a human face on what may otherwise appear to observers to be a faceless, soulless corporate entity is crucial during such times, he said. “If a corporation can focus on the wellbeing of the victims and how the corporation will improve following the crisis, they have a better chance of influencing “sadness-frame” news coverage as opposed to “anger-frame” coverage,” said Cameron. The focus of the research is not to find ways to help organizations avoid responsibility, according to Cameron, but instead to help them handle crises as effectively as possible. “Crises are going to happen,” he said. “Unfortunately, planes will crash and there will be oil spills. This study helps to show how the public will react to different types of news coverage of crises, and subsequently, what the best ways are for corporations to handle any crises they may encounter.” Related posts: September 11 Text Messages Reveal Emotional Timeline, Says Researchers How Israeli Media Framing Is Causing a Division Among Its People Scientists map what factors influence the news agenda

Continue reading here:
News Framing Affects the Public’s Emotional Response [Study]

How different are we? The issue of whether the differences between men and women are real or imaginary has been a matter of much debate. Now a new study conducted by the University of Turin in Italy and published in the journal PLoS ONE claims to have uncovered evidence that large differences in personality exist between men and women. Previous research has lent little credence to the popular school of thought that men and women are so different that they may as well live on different planets. However, lead author Marco Del Giudice claims to have developed a more accurate method to measure and analyze what he says are significant personality differences between men and women. Under Del Giudice, investigators took personality measurements from more than 5,000 men and 5,000 women. They measured 15 different traits, including warmth and sensitivity. Unlike previous studies, Del Giudice’s project compared comprehensive personality profiles that considered many different traits, rather than focusing upon differences in the incidence of individual traits between the sexes. When the data is looked at this way, very large differences between men and women are seen. Del Giudice admits that these individual differences, taken separately, do appear much less significant. He contends, however, that previous researchers not only neglected to correct for measurement errors, but that their practice of looking at one trait at a time obscured the big picture. As a result, according to Del Giudice, previous investigators failed to recognize the full extent of personality differences between men and women. Related posts: Beautiful people convey personality traits better during first impressions Study Finds Surprising Gender Differences Related to Sexual Harassment Evidence Says Women Are Better Multitaskers Than Men [Study]

Read more:
Significant Personality Differences Between Men And Women Found [Study]

When she entered BU Law, Sarah Saucedo (’06) had no concrete picture of where she wanted to be five years after graduation. What she did have was a clear vision of who she was as a person, an understanding of what was important in her life, and a firm conviction that a legal career would be the best way to pursue her passion for international affairs. Read more at: http://www.bu.edu/law/communications/index-article-Saucedo.html

See the article here:
Sarah Saucedo on Working for Winston & Strawn LLP

Our lives are awash in the blue-white light of our smartphone screens. It is hard to walk down a street without bumping into someone, often literally, who is busily typing into their smartphones. More and more Americans are cancelling home phone service in favor of using their cell as their primary number. Servicing or even purchasing a non-smartphone is becoming harder and harder. Our phones keep our schedules, take our photos and videos, store our contacts, and –oh yeah– make phone calls. One of the primary reason we love our smartphones is the ability to keep in contact with friends far away. The pioneer application for this is of course Facebook. Facebook has altered the way this generation socializes. We can keep up with our friends who we may have otherwise fallen out of contact with years ago. Grandma can see all the photos from Junior’s birthday party in Time Square from her comfortable living room in Phoenix. A whole host of  apps have been spawned to give you Facebook on your phone. Each app offers different levels of access and features. Likewise each application has its own unique quirks and shortcomings. Let’s explore a few of them to better our understanding: Blackberry Facebook 2.0 beta Positives Facebook Chat – catching up in real-time New Navigation Grid – easier to find what you’re looking for Negatives Still sluggish for photos – don’t expect to thumb through an album quickly Bugs in chat app –these will likely be ironed out in the near future. Android: Friendcaster Facebook App Positives All in one app, instead of accessing some features through the browser. Tablet friendly taking full advantage of the larger screen Negatives Invasive notifications open the app itself despite what else you might be doing most of the time. Your farm will miss you if you don’t use a browser to keep up with it and your other games. Facebook Version 4 for iPhone Positives Games! You won’t have to open a browser to keep up with your farm and more Apps – access your favorite apps on the go! Navigation and Notification – Send a message or see your notifications or browse without losing your place in News Feed Negatives Scaling for the iPad causes spacing issues Comment bugs – sometimes the posts tease you from just off screen tapping around randomly will often fix the problem Related posts: The Facebook Obsession and Its Effect on Communication [Infographic] Facebook Profile Picture Statistics [Infographic] Study: Facebook photo sharing reflects focus on female appearance

View original post here:
Facebook App Comparison for Your Smartphone

Just as retail stores are often judged by the brand names they stock, online news portals tend to be judged by the sources of the articles they post. According to a new study by researchers at Penn State and published in Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly , people who access news articles from credible sources through online portals such as Yahoo News or Google News tend to view the portals themselves as more credible. According to researcher S. Shyam Sundar, online news portals, which are often little more than fancy delivery systems for stories that originated elsewhere, reap most of the benefits of news sites, including enhanced credibility and revenue generation, while assuming little of the risk. He points out that even when the news item turns out to lack credibility, the portal is rarely held liable. The investigators exposed study participants to various online news articles and asked them to rate the credibility of both the online portals the articles were accessed through and the original sources of the articles. To prevent participants from rating the articles based upon the quality of the writing, the researchers presented the articles through what appeared to be two different online portals and attributed them to two different original sources. For the purposes of the study, Google News was chosen as an example of a highly credible portal and the Drudge Report represented a low-credibility online portal. The New York Times served as a highly credible original source, while the National Enquirer acted as its low-credibility counterpart. When participants read an article they believed was from a trusted source, they were more likely to rate the online portal they accessed it through as credible. When they read an article they thought came from a source that lacked credibility, they tended to view the portal as less credible. Unfortunately for sources that were perceived as having low credibility, reading an article on a trusted portal was unlikely to make the reader view the source more favorably. In spite of these results, Sundar noted that readers rarely took note of original sources unless they became involved in the story. When articles failed to engage an individual participant, he or she was unlikely to make more than a cursory investigation into the source of the article and was more likely to make a quick judgment based solely on the perceived credibility of the online portal. It has become more and more difficult for consumers of news to trace the sources of information. When a reader views an article in a print copy of the New York Times, it is very clear where the story came from and who is taking responsibility for its accuracy. When the same article is viewed online, however, the story may have been taken from the original source and channeled through an online portal, forwarded via email and then posted on Facebook. Sources may become murky and may disappear altogether along the way, according to Sundar. “With traditional media it’s fairly clear who the source is,” he said. “But in online media, it gets very murky because there are so many sources.” Related posts: Accents Are Not Perceived as Trustworthy [Study] Newspaper Endorsements Influence Voters [Study] Cancer news articles may contribute to confusion about cancer

Go here to see the original:
Trusted Sources Lend Credibility to Online Portals [Study]