Group items tagged

People have always spoken differently from how they write, and texting is actually talking with your fingers Texting has long been bemoaned as the downfall of the written word, "penmanship for illiterates," as one critic called it. To which the proper response is LOL.

This article explores the argument that texting might be ruining and defacing the importance behind the english language. It explains how texting has really become its own language. It has created a different type of grammar, conventions, and patterns to writing.

When you text someone, are you writing or talking? People have always spoken differently from the way they write. This article says that texting properly is actually closer to spoken language than it is to writing, and that it is a new kind of talking and is developing its own kind of grammar and conventions. It uses "LOL" to give an example of how the texting language is changing, just like spoken languages are constantly evolving.

Lori Schade, a marriage and family therapist at Brigham Young University, led a study that surveyed 276 young adults from 2009 to 2011. All were in committed relationships; more than half were either engaged or married. Almost all texted their partner multiple times a day. Her findings: Texting terms of endearment seems to shore up relationships. Affectionate affirmations help mitigate hurts and frustrations. Women who texted their partner a lot considered the relationship more stable, yet men who received those texts or texted a lot themselves said they were less satisfied with the relationship. Working things out face-to-face, rather than texting, may be more beneficial when negotiating crucial conversations. With texting, people tend to keep responding, rather than slowing down to gain perspective on the situation. Also, unlike conversations, texts don't fade with time: the archive of messages allows people to review the exchanges and consequently, revive hurt feelings.

This article talks about how texting makes students less comfortable with face-to-face conversations. It also talks about how most "texters" only have surface-level conversations.

Texting has, in many ways, made communication easier by helping people avoid long, unpleasant phone conversations and making a quick "Hello" much easier. Texting prevents us from fully developing from face-to-face communication, surface level communication, written communication, and really alters social boundaries.

This article discusses how Texting has, in many ways, made communication easier by helping people avoid long, unpleasant phone conversations and making a quick "Hello" much easier. According to a research done 72% of teenagers text regularly, and one in three sends more than 100 texts per day.

In a 2013 study, Karla Klein Murdock, a professor of psychology at Washington and Lee University, researched college-age texters. She found high-volume texters who were most stressed in their relationships were also most likely to admit to experiencing academic burnout and the lowest emotional well-being. Poorer sleep quality also seemed to plague the frequent texters. Why might heavy texting carry such a costly toll on people who are highly stressed in their relationships? A reasonable possibility that Murdock suggests has to do with the behavior and expectations of the heavy texter. Texting creates its own relational vortex. If the texts are flying fast and furious, things can easily get out of hand. Without the in-person cues that you would get if you were having a face-to-face discussion, misunderstandings and hurt feelings can quickly escalate. Texting also carries a cognitive cost, draining your attentional resources. As your inner reserve is worn down, you become exhausted and burned out. The physiological activation involved in texting erodes your sleep, and the stage is set for you to feel emotionally depleted.

Article explores the philosophical battle between those who believe in leveled reading--adjusting the difficulty of text to suit the ability of the reader--and those who emphasize the importance of "challenge" by having all students grapple with the same "complex texts." Leveled reading has become increasingly easier with the advent of technology. New-generation leveling tools like Newsela allow every student to read the same story, albeit at varying levels of complexity. "This facilitates the social learning that happens when students engage in a shared discussion of the text," Cogan-Drew notes. Second, digital reading programs can make leveling more discreet, preventing students from being teased or stigmatized for reading at a lower level. Compared to the large numbers emblazoned on the covers of many leveled-reader print books, the computerized versions call far less attention to the degree of competency of their users. At the same time, students using these programs are often given the option of dialing up or down their reading level themselves, supporting the development of their "metacognition," or awareness of their own cognitive abilities. Defenders of leveled reading and the champions of complex texts may share more common ground than they realize, however. Both agree that to become fluent readers, students must read a lot on their own-and such independent reading calls for not-too-easy, not-too-hard selections that look a lot like leveled reading. Meanwhile, both sides also concur that students should be asked to wrestle at times with more challenging texts-but in the classroom, where teachers are available to offer help and head off discouragement.

Teenagers use text messaging more than any other mode of communication, so it may be hard to tell. But youngsters who check their phones continually, snap if you interrupt them and are so preoccupied with texting that they skip sleep and don't get their work done may be compulsive texters, a new study says. Overall, girls text compulsively at a far higher rate than boys do. And unlike girls, boys in the study who were compulsive texters were not at risk of doing poorly in school. Dr. Lister-Landman hypothesized that girls' texts may focus more on relationships and be more emotionally laden, causing them anxiety. Studies have shown that communicating by cellphone about problems or negative feelings is more common among young women than among men.

A link to the full study is embedded in the NYT article, but you can also find a .pdf of the full study on our course Canvas Page, Qtr. 1, Cycle 6, Resources for Cycle 6.

Alexia LaFata in Culture Texting is the biggest catch-22 of our time. We love it for its convenience and fun Emojis, but we probably don't notice just how much it's making us feel like sh*t. Everybody loves the feeling of the little red (1) on the screen, but what about when you're waiting for an answer that never comes?

Because each individual and gender values and perceives sending and receiving text messages unequally, it is often difficult to assume the intent of a person's text message. Due to assumptions, social normality conditions, and the expectations people have on each other, the objective of a person's message can get lost in the receiver's translation and perception of the text.

Although this url may seem absurd to be talking about 7 rules of texting, it is sadly very true. It's crazy how words/texting can change one's mood in an instant depending on punctuation and length of a certain text. Just like in the movie Catfish, I realized that many people get tricked into online relationships because of certain texting strategies that lure people in. Short, sweet, and to the point messages can easily hook someone's attention.

Article talks re: the changing nature of a period. Its original function, to indicate the end of a thought, has become obsolete in texting, because of the ability to "send". Now the period can be used to indicate seriousness or a sense of finality. But caution is needed, said linguist Gretchen McCulloch, noting that problems can start to arise when you combine a period with a positive sentiment, such as "Sure" or "Sounds good." "Now you've got positive words and serious punctuation and the clash between them is what creates that sense of passive-aggression," said McCulloch. Binghamton University psychology professor Celia Klin says a period can inadvertently set a tone, because while text messaging may function like speech, it lacks many of the expressive features of face-to-face verbal communication, like "facial expressions, tone of voice, our ability to elongate words, to say some things louder, to pause." Our language has evolved, and "what we have done with our incredible linguistic genius is found ways to insert that kind of emotional, interpersonal information into texting using what we have," said Klin. "And what we have is things like periods, emoticons, other kinds of punctuation. So people have repurposed the period to mean something else."

This article reveals research about the effect of students texting in class. Not surprisingly, it was found that students who text in class receive lower grades and do not learn as much, compared to students who do not text.

An article discusses the effect of text on communication, and why people tend to text others even when they are with others in person. It also talks about the future of texting and its possible effects on human connection.

(Posting for Ashley Ishimura) This is about how being able to be "fluent" in texting can actually help in life. Just as writing became a new way of expressing language all those thousands of years ago, texting is a new form of expression entirely representative of the way we communicate today-that is, quickly, economically, and on the go. Texting may also enhance social gregariousness and positively impact reading and language development.

"Talking or texting on a phone while walking can make it difficult to stay on course and may interfere with memory recall ... Moreover, participants who were texting while walking veered off course demonstrating a 61 percent increase in lateral deviation and 13 percent increase in distance traveled."

Screens have changed our reading patterns from the linear, left-to-right sequence of years past to a wild skimming and skipping pattern as we hunt for important words and information. One 2006 study of the eye movements of 232 people looking at Web pages found they read in an "F" pattern, scanning all the way across the top line of text but only halfway across the next few lines, eventually sliding their eyes down the left side of the page in a vertical movement toward the bottom. None of this is good for our ability to comprehend deeply, scientists say. Reading text punctuated with links leads to weaker comprehension than reading plain text, several studies have shown. A 2007 study involving 100 people found that a multimedia presentation mixing words, sounds and moving pictures resulted in lower comprehension than reading plain text did. Slow reading means a return to a continuous, linear pattern, in a quiet environment free of distractions. Advocates recommend setting aside at least 30 to 45 minutes in a comfortable chair far from cellphones and computers. Some suggest scheduling time like an exercise session. Many recommend taking occasional notes to deepen engagement with the text.

Marion Underwood is drowning in teenage texting data. For the last four years, the University of Texas at Dallas professor has been collecting texts sent by and to 175 adolescent students at a large suburban Texas high school as part of a study dubbed the BlackBerry Project.

Children now are now texting at a young age, and are not learning the necessary social skills they were supposed to.

Parents have a long list of concerns about children using technology: Will they be hurt by cyber bullying? Or meet with online predators? Will their homework suffer because they're texting 100 times a day? But what about a more basic question like, Will they be able to hold their own in conversation?

Because text messaging is a conversation that involves a lot of back-and-forth, people add fillers as a way to mimic spoken language. We see this with the increased use of ellipses, which can invite the recipient to continue the conversation. The period is the opposite of that - a definitive stop that signals, as linguistics professor Mark Liberman has explained, "This is final, this is the end of the discussion." For some, this can appear angry or standoffish--but why? The use of the period is an example of what linguist John Gumperz termed situational code-switching: when we change how we talk depending on where we are, who we're talking to or how we're communicating. Using a period in a text message is perceived as overly formal, making the writer come across as insincere or awkward, just like using formal spoken language in a casual setting, like a bar.

This article answers the question of why sarcasm is hard to detect in texting and email conversations. It depends on things like context of the person like the relationship you have with the person you are using sarcasm with. Also, with texting, you can't convey your emotions with facial expressions like you do in face-to-face conversation. Emojis help a little bit with that, but it isn't the same as a face-to-face interaction.

In this study, we address the communication technologies individuals within romantic relationships are using to communicate with one another, the frequency of use, and the association between the use of these technologies and couple's positive and negative communication.Participants consisted of individuals involved in a serious, committed, heterosexual relationship. The Relationship Evaluation Questionnaire instrument was used to assess a variety of relationship variables. The majority of individuals within the study frequently used cell phones and text messaging to communicate with their partner, with ' ' expressing affection ' ' being the most common reason for contact. Younger individuals reported using all forms of media (except for e-mail) more frequently than older participants. Relationship satisfaction did not predict specific use of media but predicted several reasons for media use. Additional analyses revealed that text messaging had the strongest association with individuals ' positive and negative communication within their relationships. Specifically, text messaging to express affection, broach potentially confrontational subjects, and to hurt partners were associated with individuals' view of positive and negative communication within their relationship. Implications of the results are discussed.