Quintin Baker couldn’t tell if his friend was picking on him or not.

After posting a profile picture on Facebook, Baker started getting comments from his friend that made fun of the picture. The only problem was that his friend was the only one in on the joke.

‘No one got it at all,’ said Baker, a freshman French major. ‘Eventually someone posted, ‘Well, over Facebook, it’s hard to tell if you’re sarcastic or just being a jerk.”

Baker isn’t the only one to get lost in the digital translation. A recent study conducted by MTVu, the television station’s college network, the Jed Foundation and The Associated Press found that while technology, such as text messaging and social networking websites, has made communication easier, constant digital interaction holds a level of complexity that leads to misunderstandings and confusion.

‘It is not surprising to me that there is often difficulty in telling if a text message or a Facebook post is intended to be serious or non-serious,’ said Cynthia Gordon, a communication and rhetorical studies assistant professor, in an e-mail. ‘In talk, sarcasm, teasing and so on are very much indicated through tone of voice, laughter and other cues that aren’t available on Facebook or in texting.’

According to the study, 48 percent of college students say they are unsure about whether the sender of a message is serious or joking, as was the case with Baker’s profile picture dilemma.

‘People can take what you type so many different ways without knowing what you really meant,’ Baker said. ‘It’s so frustrating when you’re trying to be sarcastic to someone without a keen eye for that kind of thing.’

The study found that 85 percent of surveyed students feel compelled to answer a new text message immediately after receiving it. If someone does not immediately respond to a sent text message, six out of every 10 students reported trying to analyze the meaning of the lack of response.

Gordon said she observes this firsthand in her classes. The speed of communication is affecting students’ relationships with professors both in and out of the classroom, she said.

‘Students expect professors to respond to e-mails with the same speed as returning a text message,’ Gordon said. ‘Although communicating digitally makes it easier for students to ask for help from professors, they often send e-mails casually written, like text messages, which is frowned upon by most professors.’

Misunderstandings through digital communication often result in conflicts between peers, the study said. Though a vast majority of students stated it is best to solve conflicts with face-to-face confrontation, 70 percent have carried out arguments exclusively through text messaging.

Alecea Standlee, a graduate student in the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, is currently conducting her dissertation research on technology’s effect on relationships. Part of her research involves interviewing SyracuseUniversitystudents and understanding their technology habits. She said she was concerned when she discovered that many students used technology for conflict resolution.

‘Students need to meet face to face to solve their conflicts,’ said Standlee in an e-mail. ‘If they rely on using technology, there is no emotion conveyed in their communication, and it doesn’t work well.’

Although most students agreed with the findings of the study, some students, including freshman computer science major Terence Nip, were quick to find faults with the study’s claims.

‘It’s usually pretty obvious if the person you’re conversing with is joking because of the use of emoticons,’ Nip said. ‘Granted there are cases when it is ambiguous, but given that you’re friends with the person you’re texting with, you should be able to tell whether or not they’re joking.’

Although the topic of emoticons, textual impressions of a person’s mood or facial expression, was not mentioned in the survey, professors and students alike found them to be key in understanding digital communication.

‘Social groups are constantly in the process of developing symbolic norms, such as emoticons, or using shorthand as a way to convey emotions,’ Standlee said.

These practices are not universally understood and should be used with caution to avoid confusion, she said.

The study also examined the effects of digital communication on college students’ need for emotional help, social isolation and connectivity, as well as levels of stress and happiness.

Four out of 10 students involved in the study claimed they would be more likely to ask a friend for advice with a serious personal issue through a text message or using social networking rather than face-to-face interaction. Although SU students agreed with this statement, there were dissenting opinions about social isolation correlating with communication.

‘I don’t know why you would feel isolated online if you know you have friends outside of the Internet,’ Nip said. ‘As a student at Syracuse, however, it’s hard to get away from technology when you have to rely on Blackboard and MySlice being completely online.’

Despite differences in student opinions, Standlee and Gordon said they were glad to see a study regarding communication in the digital age in the life of the average college student. The study is useful in identifying both the harmful aspects of technology and benefits of maintaining connections, but it could further explore the topic, Gordon said.

‘Of course, recent incidents linking modern technology to tragedies are of great concern, but not explicitly addressed in the study, which deserves more attention,’ Gordon said.

Technology may raise cause for concern, but confusion and misunderstandings are not enough to stop students from using social media.

‘Facebook misunderstandings happen,’ Baker said, ‘but it’s really not a big deal.’

ervanrhe@syr.edu

Published on November 7, 2010 at 12:00 pm

Contact Erik: ervanrhe@syr.edu | @therealvandyman