Meeting with Media: Comparing Synchronous Media Sharing and Icebreaker Questions in Initial Interactions via Video Chat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Video chat continues to play an increasing role in the personal and professional lives of many people. When meeting someone for the first time via video chat, traditional icebreakers such as discussion questions may be used to ease conversation and facilitate disclosure; however, icebreaker questions have been shown to be less effective at facilitating relationships for some people than others. In this paper, we propose synchronously sharing online media as a more flexible, robust, and effective method of facilitating initial interactions in video chat. Our comparative study of icebreaker questions and media sharing reveals that shared media supports a different style of conversation than icebreakers, but results in equal levels of self-disclosure and trust along with higher levels of warranting and relatedness. Further, while the effectiveness of icebreakers in building trust is lower for individuals low in agreeableness, media sharing results in similar trust formation at all levels of agreeableness. Synchronous media sharing is a promising way of leveraging the digital context of video chat to better support early stages of relationships.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".