An Examination of the Relationship Between Culturally Recognized Symbols As Avatars and Trust in Computer
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
AN EXAMINATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CULTURALLY RECOGNIZED SYMBOLS AS AVATARS AND TRUST IN COMPUTER- MEDIATED COMMUNICATION ENVIRONMENTS Except where reference is made to the work of others, the work described in this dissertation is my own or was done in collaboration with my advisory committee. This dissertation does not include proprietary or classified information. ________________________________________ Rodger Glenn Morrison, Jr. Certificate of Approval: _________________________ _______________________ Houston H. Carr Casey G. Cegielski, Chair Professor Associate Professor Management Management _________________________ _______________________ R. Kelly Rainer, Jr. George T. Flowers George Phillips Privett Professor Dean Management Graduate School AN EXAMINATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CULTURALLY RECOGNIZED SYMBOLS AS AVATARS AND TRUST IN COMPUTER- MEDIATED COMMUNICATION ENVIRONMENTS Rodger Glenn Morrison, Jr. A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Auburn, Alabama December 19, 2008 AN EXAMINATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CULTURALLY RECOGNIZED SYMBOLS AS AVATARS AND TRUST IN COMPUTER- MEDIATED COMMUNICATION ENVIRONMENTS Rodger Glenn Morrison, Jr. Permission is granted to Auburn University to make copies of this dissertation at its discretion, upon request of individuals or institutions and at their expense. The author reserves all publication rights. _____________________________ Signature of Author _____________________________ Date of Graduation iii AN EXAMINATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CULTURALLY RECOGNIZED SYMBOLS AS AVATARS AND TRUST IN COMPUTER- MEDIATED COMMUNICATION ENVIRONMENTS Rodger Glenn Morrison, Jr. Doctor of Philosophy, December 19, 2008 (M.B.A., Troy University, 2004) (B.S., Troy University, 1999) (A.A.S., Community College of the Air Force, 1992) 181 Typed Pages Directed by Casey G. Cegielski One of the characterizations that distinguishes man from the rest of the animal world is the use of symbols. Many researchers consider the act of forming and using symbols as the central cognitive process in mankind’s thinking. A study of human communication, then, would be incomplete without a consideration of the impact of symbolism. The use of symbols in communication has been a focus of study in many disciplines including psychology, religion, literature, and more. While psychologists have focused primarily on the cognitive processes involved in forming and using symbols, anthropologists have focused on commonly accepted meanings of particular symbols. In religion and literature, researchers note certain symbolic themes and their iv associations with certain abstract meanings meant to be understood by the readers of the works being considered. In more contemporary research fields, such as computer- mediated communication, the study of culture and symbols is a relatively new focus of research efforts. While it is well known that the meanings of symbols is both taught and learned through cultural phenomena, little research exists on the cultural influence of symbol meaning on user trust. The methodologies used to gather data in this study include two opinion surveys and a lab experiment. In the first two phases of the research, student opinions of commonly recognized symbols and their meanings are obtained. In the third phase of the research, student subjects were each shown one of three different communication transcripts between two fictitious students. Each transcript differed only in the avatar used to represent one of the students. Student perceptions of the trustworthiness of one of the fictitious students were measured, as was student willingness to engage in trusting behavior. ANOVA revealed sufficient evidence to suggest that the use of symbols associated with positive character traits resulted in increased trust development. ANCOVA revealed sufficient evidence to suggest that the use of symbols associated with positive character traits resulted in increased trust development. Interactions between respondent gender and specific symbol used were also significant. These results suggest that the use of certain symbols as avatars influences the amount of trust developed toward them, as well as willingness to engage in trusting behavior, key factors in the successful implementation of technologies such as automated online virtual agents, certain knowledge sharing systems, and more. Additionally, these results suggest implications in other areas such as corporate branding, advertising, and more. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To my dearest friend and wife, Vicki, I must say that I could not have faced these many private challenges over the last few years without you. God knows how thankful I am he brought you into my life. Thank you for staying by my side, reminding me when to sleep, nursing me when sick, feeding me when I forgot to eat, and enduring alone when I was absent. I hope and pray that our lives will be long and happy together in each other’s arms. I love you now and forever, my dearest. To Dr. Anthony K. Rhee of Troy University, my journey at Auburn might never have started at all, were it not for you. I will never forget all that you have done to help me succeed. Thank you for sharing the gift of yourself, which I will never forget. Your vision, leadership, and sensitivity have taught me more than I could ever have learned from a book. May God bless you and keep you. To my extended family, the Sorrell College of Business, I cannot thank you enough. As a student in your classrooms, and as a colleague in your midst, you have remained my faithful friends, encouraging mentors, and steadfast advocates. I could never thank you enough for all you have done. To the faculty of the Department of Management, Auburn University, and especially my committee, Dr. Casey Cegielski, Dr. R. Kelly Rainer, Jr., and Dr. Houston Carr, thank you for releasing the bonds of my ignorance. Vincit qui se vincit. Soli Deo gloria! vi Style manual used: Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA), Fifth Edition Computer software used: Microsoft Word 2007; Microsoft Excel 2007; EndNote X1; AMOS 7.0; SPSS 16 for Windows vii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. xi LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... xii CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................1 CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW ...........................................................................8 Overview ..................................................................................................................8 Computer-Mediated Communications .....................................................................9 Symbolism .............................................................................................................13 Overview of Symbolism Studies ...............................................................13 Definitions..................................................................................................17 Symbol Usage ............................................................................................22 Symbol Usage in Psychology ....................................................................23 Symbol Usage in Literature and the Arts ...................................................28 Symbol Usage in Religion .........................................................................32 Archetypal Symbols ...................................................................................35 Trust .......................................................................................................................36 Overview of Trust Studies .........................................................................36 Definition and Description .........................................................................41 Trust Usage ................................................................................................45 Trust and Computer-Mediated Communications.......................................49 viii Symbols and Interpersonal Trust in Computer-Mediated Communications .........53 Research Hypotheses .............................................................................................57 CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................62 Overview ................................................................................................................62 General Information and Demographics ................................................................63 Phase 1 - General Perceptions of Symbol Meanings .............................................64 Overview ....................................................................................................64 Method Specifics .......................................................................................65 Phase 2 - Strength of Symbol Meanings ................................................................67 Overview ....................................................................................................67 Method Specifics .......................................................................................68 Phase 3 - Strength of Trust in Context ...................................................................70