Face-to-Face vs. Electronic Communication Effectiveness

Introduction and Claim

Electronic communication — such as texting and emailing — is not as effective as talking face-to-face with someone.

Premises and Supporting Data

Studies have shown that without face-to-face interaction, the lack of nonverbal cues and facial expressions prevents successful communication and hinders growth in a relationship. One study of preteens at a summer camp found that after just five days without electronics, the children showed improvement in their nonverbal communication skills (Uhls et al., 2014). We already know that nonverbal communication constitutes a significant portion of all communication — when people interact face-to-face, as little as 7% of communication is verbal (Yaffe, 2011). These preteens were therefore rapidly improving their ability to comprehend what is, in many cases, the majority of communicative meaning.

Studies of virtual teams have found that people are even inclined to interpret email text for nonverbal messages. The problem with doing so is that we tend to use shorthand for this — for example, interpreting direct communication as anger when it may not be (Cheshin, Rafaeli & Bos, 2011). Furthermore, it has been found that it is more difficult to manage intercultural differences in electronic communications. We struggle enough in face-to-face settings, but there is a greater need for contextual clues in intercultural communication; therefore, we are even more challenged when interpreting intercultural electronic communication (Bitti & Garotti, 2011). In essence, face-to-face communication allows us to express and interpret a fuller range of emotions and concepts. While we may have adapted to improve our ability to interpret electronic communications, it remains inferior to face-to-face interaction.

Warrants and Underlying Assumptions

The first warrant is that we have all experienced both face-to-face and electronic communication. The concepts presented here would be foreign to someone who had never experienced electronic communication. The second warrant is that both the audience and the speaker accept the research indicating that nonverbal communication is important, and that we understand how we have adapted to electronic communications. One unstated issue concerns young children who were born into the era of electronic communications. Having never learned in a strictly face-to-face world, the findings might not hold for them; however, the warrant here assumes that the premise holds across all cultures and all ages.

There is another important warrant: that everyone shares some agreement about what "effective" means in the context of communication. It is a fairly vague term that could mean many things. Normally, to evaluate effectiveness it is necessary to operationalize it, unless the speaker and audience are in general agreement about what effectiveness looks like in interpersonal communication. It is assumed here that such broad agreement exists, and that it includes the ability to understand the full range of emotions and context that accompany the actual words used in communication.