Doug writes: "I think the ability to actively construct who the person is (to whom you're speaking) has its own fascination (a lot like the way another generation used 'radio'). There is something intensely narcissistic about this process. Little surprise that onlone romances in 'real' life so frequently fail- our own wish fulfillments really get in the way. I'm also reminded of a time when I had a blind person as a patient and I remember the odd feeling of freedom, when once again the visual modality was not part of the interplay (the idea that I could not be seen anyway!). Also the idea that the auditory modality is eliminated as well, creates an intense inner focus on one's own thoughts, beliefs and attitudes-- ones inner voice. I think in some way we also construct how the other person "sounds". "
I would also add that not only do we construct internal sensory models of what we think the other is like, but we base much of it on unconcsious cues that are encoded in the verbal material. Normally, we respond (unconsciously or otherwise) to such cues and encoded messages that occur through the full range of sense, but here we are limited to text... although that doesn't mean that the richness of unconscious material is any lesser. I think most of us form instant impressions... feelings, auditory analogues, visual analogues... based on such elements as grammar, syntax, spelling, typing ability, and various levels of symbolic information in the content of the communication. For instance... What impressions would you have of the following posters:
Poster #1: "Greetings! I'm curious to know what you think about the recent finding concerning online relationships."
Poster #2: "HI CAN YOU TELL ME HOW TO BE A THERAPIST"
In terms of our response and the ability to (consciously or unconsciously) process online communication -- I don't think the amount of such subtle information is any less, it just comes at you in a different way.
Phil http://members.aol.com/rbcfpstu/