Timing is Everything: The Importance of Prompt Responses in Texting
Faculty Advisor Name
Sri Siddhi N. Upadhyay
Department
Department of Graduate Psychology
Description
Introduction
Text messaging is a form of computer-mediated communication which mimics spoken conversation with its turn-taking nature. However, texting lacks pragmatic cues present in spoken conversation such as body language, facial expressions, and intonations, making it more difficult to properly express oneself clearly. To make up for some of this, texters have created textisms, cues to aid comprehension. Examples include emoticons, emoji, and even repurposing punctuation to indicate abruptness and negativity (Arp et al., 2021; Byron & Baldridge, 2007; Gunraj, 2016; Houghton et al., 2018). Some research indicates that time might constitute another such textism. For example, Hwang and colleagues (2019) found that delaying responses by only 90 seconds created significant increases in frustration with and decreases in liking of the other texter when a response is time sensitive. A delay this short however, may not have much of a practical impact on the liking of the person once the task is over. Further, with no existing relationship between the texting partners, it is unclear if familiarity with someone’s response patterns factors into the consideration of time as a pragmatic cue. In the present study, participants read mock texting conversations between friends that included a question requiring a time sensitive response. However, the response was sent after a delay of four hours.
Method
190 James Madison University undergraduate students participated in exchange for course credit.
Forty items were created, each depicting a text-message conversation between two friends. Each item existed in a no delay condition and a delayed (by four hours) condition. All final responses were positive one word replies.
Participants rated the enthusiasm of responses on a five-point Likert scale. 1 indicated a very unenthusiastic response and 5 indicated a very enthusiastic response. Participants who took more than two hours or less than eight minutes to complete the study were excluded from analysis.
Results
Using a within-subjects t-test, we found that delayed responses (M1=2.79, SD1=0.15) were consistently rated lower than non-delayed responses (M2=3.19, SD2=0.12). The difference was significant both when analyzed by items t1(39)=1.685, p<0.001, and participants t2(182)=10.36, p<0.001 (M3=3.19, SD3=0.48, M4=2.79, SD4=0.43). Cohen’s d was 2.93 by items and 0.88 by participants, both indicating large effect sizes.
Discussion
This study aids our understanding of how text messaging stands in for spoken conversation. Our findings indicate that time constitutes another pragmatic cue in text messaging conversations. Participants who saw the same positive responses without a delay consistently rated them as more enthusiastic than those who saw the responses delayed by four hours. In other words, the same response sent immediately after receiving a request will be perceived differently from one received hours later. It therefore appears that it is not only the content of a response which matters, but also the timeliness with which it is sent.
Timing is Everything: The Importance of Prompt Responses in Texting
Introduction
Text messaging is a form of computer-mediated communication which mimics spoken conversation with its turn-taking nature. However, texting lacks pragmatic cues present in spoken conversation such as body language, facial expressions, and intonations, making it more difficult to properly express oneself clearly. To make up for some of this, texters have created textisms, cues to aid comprehension. Examples include emoticons, emoji, and even repurposing punctuation to indicate abruptness and negativity (Arp et al., 2021; Byron & Baldridge, 2007; Gunraj, 2016; Houghton et al., 2018). Some research indicates that time might constitute another such textism. For example, Hwang and colleagues (2019) found that delaying responses by only 90 seconds created significant increases in frustration with and decreases in liking of the other texter when a response is time sensitive. A delay this short however, may not have much of a practical impact on the liking of the person once the task is over. Further, with no existing relationship between the texting partners, it is unclear if familiarity with someone’s response patterns factors into the consideration of time as a pragmatic cue. In the present study, participants read mock texting conversations between friends that included a question requiring a time sensitive response. However, the response was sent after a delay of four hours.
Method
190 James Madison University undergraduate students participated in exchange for course credit.
Forty items were created, each depicting a text-message conversation between two friends. Each item existed in a no delay condition and a delayed (by four hours) condition. All final responses were positive one word replies.
Participants rated the enthusiasm of responses on a five-point Likert scale. 1 indicated a very unenthusiastic response and 5 indicated a very enthusiastic response. Participants who took more than two hours or less than eight minutes to complete the study were excluded from analysis.
Results
Using a within-subjects t-test, we found that delayed responses (M1=2.79, SD1=0.15) were consistently rated lower than non-delayed responses (M2=3.19, SD2=0.12). The difference was significant both when analyzed by items t1(39)=1.685, p<0.001, and participants t2(182)=10.36, p<0.001 (M3=3.19, SD3=0.48, M4=2.79, SD4=0.43). Cohen’s d was 2.93 by items and 0.88 by participants, both indicating large effect sizes.
Discussion
This study aids our understanding of how text messaging stands in for spoken conversation. Our findings indicate that time constitutes another pragmatic cue in text messaging conversations. Participants who saw the same positive responses without a delay consistently rated them as more enthusiastic than those who saw the responses delayed by four hours. In other words, the same response sent immediately after receiving a request will be perceived differently from one received hours later. It therefore appears that it is not only the content of a response which matters, but also the timeliness with which it is sent.
