The Impact of Language Variety and Expertise on Perceptions of online Political Discussions

The Impact of Language Variety and Expertise on Perceptions of Online Political Discussions

China Bailey

COMM 300 7982

Date: March 31, 2019

The Impact of Language Variety and Expertise on Perceptions of Online Political Discussions

Literature Review

        A literature review, mainly explores scholarly articles, books and other sources that are relevant to a particular issue or theory. Literature reviews, therefore provide a summary, description and the critical evaluation of the relevant sources in regard to a particular concept being investigated. In their article, titled “The Impact of Language Variety and Expertise on Perceptions of Online Political Discussions” Kenny Tan, Debbie Swee, Corine Lim, Benjamin Detenber and Lubna Alsagoff provide and extensive review of the literature that is presently existing on the impact of information technology in communication.

        The authors contend that given the fact that majority of computer mediated communication takes place in text format, it is only reasonable to infer that language variables are becoming a key part of independent content and the topics being discussed. Some of the language variables that are explored by the authors include syntactic and pragmatic codes. They further argue that the fact that people can contribute to discussions independently does not only bring about authoritativeness but further enhances the degree of sociability. The authors give the example of Singapore, where the Government has passed policies that insist that each citizen has to learn English not only for economic survival, but for ensuring that the societies have one language in common (Tan et al, 2007). The authors further argue that expertise is equally important. Some of the factors that determine the impact of the degree of expertise of an individual argue that the number of posts that are made by an individual, the date that the individual joined the forum and a designated label such as an account being verified. According to the authors, individuals who are experts at online political discussions come out as conceptual, principled and articulated. The only term that the authors defined is CMC that stands for Computer Mediated Communication.

Hypothesis and Methodology

        The first hypothesis of the survey is that in the lean world of text-based communication, the language that individuals use online is a key source of background information, which can possibly reveal their gender, social position and class. Their second hypothesis is that in the context of Singapore, the use of the colloquial variety of English that is known as Singlish often functions as a heuristic cue that can affect the kind of judgment that people have on the speakers. The study therefore sought to establish the impact of the status cues in text based computer mediated communication in regard to how they influence the perceptions of online discussions and the impacts of the cues in encouraging people to actively participate in online political discussions (Tan, 2007).  The experiment had a mixed design with two major between subject factors in the form of expertise and language.

        Eight undergraduates 42 men and 38 women with an average age of 21.5 were recruited mainly through email adverts. The participants were offered an incentive of $10 for taking part in the study with Non-Singaporean respondents being screened from the sample to avert confusion. The participants were presented with two political discussion message threads (Tan, 2007). One topic covered the recent dispute that existed between the pilots union and the management of Singapore Airlines. The other topic was on the recent change in policy that any new buyer of new Housing Development Board units was supposed to pay a 10% deposit upon having an intention to buy.

        For the manipulation of the language variable, two versions of postings by the predominant discussants were produced using Standard English and Singlish version. The Standard English version employed the use of grammatically correct English and standard sentence structures. On the other hand, the Singlish version had non-standard grammar structures along with local jargon.

Discussion

        The study established that expertise and language cues used within any CMC context do not have the impact that was anticipated. The study ascertained that the effects are quite limited and that the status markers of language and expertise did not in any way influence perceptions held by the discussants and their degree of informativeness. The study similarly established that the cues did not affect the intentions of the Singaporean subjects to take part in online political discussions. The study similarly established that each time the discussants that were regarded as novices used Standard English; they were evaluated favorably as friendly, pleasant, unselfish and virtuous than those who used Singlish (Tan et al, 2007). The study similarly determined that there was no major impact on language each time the individuals taking part in the discussion were regarded as experts. As such, it can be concluded that indeed novices always benefit from the use of Standard English though expert do not. It is imperative o note however, that the findings contravene those of the previous surveys that had established that both powerless and powerful language styles are regarded as expertise, which affects the persuasiveness and the credibility of a message.