外刊阅读20241123｜现在的网络缩写有多离谱？？

+

上期划线句答案

+

本期内容

◆

双语阅读

Psychologists analysed messages from more than 5,000 people across eight studies and found that those who used abbreviations were deemed less sincere and were less likely to receive responses as a result. Abbreviations have increased dramatically in the era of digital messaging, and have become the default for quickfire communication in close-knit groups, but the findings suggest that dashing off a swift “hru?” might not seem as genuine as taking the time to spell out: “How are you?”

David Fang at Stanford University and colleagues at the University of Toronto ran the studies to explore the impact of abbreviations in different messaging scenarios . They began by asking people to rate the sincerity of messages with and without abbreviations and how likely they were to respond. Next, they analysed messages on the Discord social messaging platform, during an online speed-dating experiment, and from the dating app, Tinder. People who used abbreviations tended to receive fewer responses than those who spelled words out , and the responses were typically shorter, the studies found. While younger people used more abbreviations, the negative effect remained, the researchers say.

Since the world’s first text message in December 1992, senders have developed a more efficient language with complete words and phrases dropped in favour of the bare minimum of letters. Half-hearted agreement becomes idrc, for “I don’t really care”. And why bother with the chore of writing “I love you” when ily will do? The researchers delved into the issue to understand whether abbreviations, which are intended to convey exactly the same meaning as the full word, had nuanced effects on recipients. One school of thought is that abbreviations are more laid back and informal, and foster a closeness between those messaging. Another holds that abbreviations reveal a lack of effort and interest in the person.

In one of the experiments, people who received messages full of abbreviations responded with shorter messages than otherwise, raising the prospect of a feedback loop that crunches text even further. “Our findings echo literature indicating that people value conversational quality, preferring messages that convey thoughtfulness and personal connection,” the authors write. Despite the researchers drawing on real-world data for some of their work, other psychologists questioned whether abbreviations were really so problematic.

Professor Linda Kaye, a psychologist at Edge Hill University, said: “It’s important to recognise that in real-world, text-based message interactions, receivers are very likely to have much more context and acquaintanceship with the sender and so perceptions will be based on a much richer set of information. It might be that in a real world interaction, these perceptions are less prominent or impactful.”