Do You Think What I Think: Perceptions of Delayed Instant Messages in Computer-Mediated ...
summary
Seven-day diaries + follow-up interviews with 16 couples (ages 19–33, ~50% long-distance, LINE and Facebook common) show three concrete grounding mechanisms—status grounding, process grounding, context grounding—that determine whether delays are seen as accidental or intentional. Findings: mutual knowledge from direct (asking) and indirect (social posts, read receipts, activity patterns) channels changes sender expectations and receiver interpretations; some receivers intentionally delay to signal anger; three couples create explicit end-of-conversation signals. Design suggestions: auto-extract calendar/social signals, highlight conversation boundaries, and add urgency/intent markers.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (9)
- 0:00Introduction
- 0:48Delayed messages in relationships
- 3:22Research questions and methods
- 5:49Status grounding explained
- 9:23Process and contact grounding
- 12:19Expectancy violations and grounding
- 13:43Interpreting delays and contact grounding
- 14:28Design suggestions for grounding
- 15:58Conclusion and Q&A
related talks
13mTrust-Enabled Privacy: Social Media Designs to Support Adolescent User Boundary...
21mThe Joy of Missing Out and the Freedom of Disconnecting
39mOpening Keynote: Between JOMO and FOMO: You are reshaping communication.
17mSeeing Differently: Filling the Space between the Real and Digital
27mDigital Well-Being: If you need to resort to alert fatigue, you’re designing it wrong.
04mPerformance is about people, not metrics
20mChameleon Devices: Investigating More Secure and Discreet Mobile Interactions via Active ...
39mAttentive Design