Some communication analysts consider "media richness" to be a key component of media choice. According to this theory, media are considered to vary in their richness, which is a function of their capacity to provide immediate feedback and social presence (Daft, & Lengel 1986, Rice, & Love 1987). According to Short, Williams, and Christie (1976) social presence is the feeling that communication exchanges are social, warm, personal, and sensitive. As such, a communication media's social presence is defined by the user's subjective perception of its ability to provide social presence.

Face-to-face communication is considered to be the "richest" media followed by a lesser degree are the telephone, electronic mail (e-mail) and written letters or memos (Haythornthwaite, Wellman, & Mantei 1995). The media richness of face-to-face communication lies in the participants ability to receive immediate feedback by means of both verbal and non-verbal cues. Whereas, social presence is limited to verbal cues in telephone communication, and all but removed from e-mail and written documents (Perse, Burton, Kovner, Lears, & Sen, 1992).

Face-to-face communication is considered to be the "richest" media followed by a lesser degree are the telephone, electronic mail (e-mail) and written letters or memos (Haythornthwaite Wellman, & Mantei 1995). The media richness of face-to-face communication lies in the participants ability to receive immediate feedback by means of both verbal and non-verbal cues. Whereas, social presence is limited to verbal cues in telephone communication, and all but removed from e-mail and written documents (Perse, Burton, Kovner, Lears, & Sen, 1992).

Although e-mail provides few nonverbal cues such as facial expression, gaze, or posture, it is not always seen as low in social presence (Perse et al., 1992). Studies have shown that as users become more familiar with using this media they begin to personalize their messages. Users try to convey their social presence by using such things as humor, insults, or symbols to express their feelings and individual personality (Rice & Love, 1987). In a study of college students, CMC was shown to be used more by those students who felt they could convey more interpersonal presence (Perse et al., 1992). Thus, the "richness" of a particular media is a very subjective matter that may very greatly from one individual to another.

Other communication theories suggest that the users' social environment determines not only what communication media is selected, but how it is used. According to the theory of media selection (Daft, Lengel, and Trevino, 1987) it is the situation which determines the users communication media choice. Each media type is seen as sending different symbolic cues (e.g., a formal letter sends a much different message than a memo), as such, users will select the media that is deemed appropriate for the situation.

On the other hand, Fulk, Steinfield, Schmitz, and Power (1987) suggest that the users perception of their environment, and their place within that social structure will determine how they choose to communicate. For instance, people communicate differently in a social environment than a work place environment. Within the hiearchial structure of an organization the users selection of media will depend on whether they are communicating with someone on an upper, a lower, or the same level as themselves (Dubrovsky, Kiesler, & Sethna, 1991; Golden, Beauclair, & Sussman, 1992; Haythornthwaite et al., 1995).

Researchers have also examined communication media selection as it relates to specific tasks (e.g., receiving work, giving work, collaborative writing, emotional support) within an organization (Haythornthewaite et al., 1995). They found that face-to-face encounters were used most frequently, followed by e-mail. E-mail was chosen over face-to-face meetings for giving work, and social support. The participants of this study found e-mail to be a very rich media in terms of its ability to provide feedback, and reduce social pressure.

Researchers have identified several factors as being influential in an individuals selection of one communication media over another: media richness, social environment, hierarchical structures, appropriateness to task. But, none of these studies examined what role an individuals personality type would play in their preference of one communication mode over another. Since our personality type has been shown to effect how we live, love, and work, it stands to reason that it would also effect how we choose to communicate with others.

Though temperament differences have always been evident, it was Swiss psychologist C. G. Jung (1875-1961) that first classified personality types in 1920. Years later, Isabel Myers along with her mother Katheryn Briggs developed a series of questions to measure personality differences. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) as it came to be called has been shown to be valid and reliable in its ability to measure personality differences (Kroeger & Thuesen, 1988).

The MBTI reports a persons preferences on four scales: Extraversion-Introversion (E or I), Sensing-Intuition (S-N), Thinking-Feeling (T-F), and Judging-Perceiving (J-P). Though an individuals personality type is comprised of a combination of these four scales, for the purpose of this study only the Extraversion-Introversion (E-I) scales will be measured.

David Keirsey & Marilyn Bates, in their book Please Understand Me: Character & Temperament Types define an extraverted person as one "who chooses people as a source of energy," whereas "the person who prefers solitude to recover energy may tend toward introversion" (p. 14). Extraverts have a need for sociability, and appear to be energized by people. They enjoy "talking to people, playing with people, and working with people" (p. 14). Conversely, introverts "desire space, private places in the mind, and private environmental places" (p. 14).

This study will examine the relationship between an individuals personality type and his/her preferred method of communication. Specifically, in two areas: a) preferred communication media between different organizational levels, b) preferred communication media for work-related tasks. Since extroverted personality types prefer being around people, and "richer" sources of communication media lead to the more face-to-face communication the following hypothesis is made: extraverted personality types will prefer to use richer modes of communication than introverted personality types.

Subjects

Materials

Procedure

Upon receipt of the questionnaires the Keirsey Temperament Scale was hand scored and a temperament score of either Externality (E), or Internality (I) was entered into the computer. The Preferred Communication surveys were entered directly into the computer for SPSS analysis.

Communication between organizational levels was analyzed with a 4 x 2 x 3 mixed design ANOVA, using the four communication modes, (face-to-face, telephone, memo/letter, e-mail), two personality types (introvert/extravert), and the three organizational levels (supervisor, supervisee, peer) as independent variables. The main effect for communication method was significant (F (3,42) = 29.88, p <.01), indicating a preference for one communication method over another. The two-way interaction between communication and organizational level was also significant (F (6,84) = 2.70, p = .019). indicating the preferred method of communication varies depending on who they are communicating with (see Figure 1). One the other hand, the nonsignificant two-way interactions between communication and temperament (F (3,42) = 1.22, p > .05), indicate they do not effect preferred method of communication. The other main effects, temperament (F (1,14) = 0, p > .05), and organizational level (F (2,28) = 0, p > .05), as well as, the three-way interaction (F (6,84) = 1.91, p > .05) were nonsignificant.

But, the low response rate to this survey may, in fact, reveal more about individuals preferred method of communication than do the actual results from the survey. It certainly raises some issues that future researcher might wish to consider when designing experiments about preferred communication modes. Would allowing respondents a choice of media (e-mail, on-line, or paper and pencil) by which they could complete the survey increase responses rates? Would their choice also indicate something about not only their preferred method of communication for a particular task, but my also speak to the issue of personality type?

On the other hand, the data do indicate that how they choose to communicate does vary depending on who they are communicating with. This finding supports the social environment theory (Dubrovsky et al., 1991, Fulk et al., 1987, Golden et al., 1992, Hathornthwaite et al., 1995) which states that users selection of media will depend on their perception of their environment, and their place within that social structure. Furthermore, their choice of media varies depending on whether they are communicating with one on an upper, lower, or the same level as themselves. This finding may also indicate

The current study was limited to the employees of a college, but similar results might be obtained from employees of any organization in which employees have access to all the CMC modes examined in this study.

Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H., & Trevino, L. K. (1987, Sept). Message equivocality, media selection, and manager performance: Implications for information systems. MIS Quarterly, 355-366.

Dubrovsky, V. J., Kiesler, S., & Sethna, B. N. (1991). The equalization phenomenon: Status effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision-making groups. Human-Computer Interaction, 6, 119-146.

Fulk, J., Steinfield, C. W., Schmitz, J., & Power, J. G. (1987). A social information processing model of media use in organizations. Communication Research, 14, 529-552.

Golden, P. A., Beauclair, R., & Sussman, L. (1992). Factors affecting electronic mail use. Computers in Human Behavior, 8, 297-311.

Haythornthwaite, C., Wellman, B., & Mantei, M. (1995). Work relationships and media use: A social network analysis. Group Decision and Negotiation, 4, 193-211.

Keirsey, D., & Bates, M. (1984). Please understand me: Character & temperament types. Del Mar, CA: Nemesis Book.

Kroeger, O., & Thuesen, J. (1988). Type talk. New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell.

Perse, E. M., Buron, P. I., Kovner, E. S., Lears, M. E., & Sen, R. J. (1992). Predicting computer-mediated communication in a college. Communication Research Reports, 9, 161-170.

Rice, R. E., & Love, G. (1987). Electronic love: Socioemotional content in a computer-mediated communication network. Communication Research, 14, 85-108.

Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. New York: John Wiley.

Page Last Updated .