#6-Aoki and Woodruff's Ambiguity Analysis

Aoki and Woodruff explained that there are two factors that account for ambiguity in mediated communication settings. One is passive effects which the medium itself brings. In all media other than face-to-face, this is valid. Due to the fact that the communicators cannot see each other (separated by a medium), ambiguities, such as lack of facial expression feedback, are present. The other factor, active effects, are those that happen when "participants try to influence how others are accounting for their own actions". Because communication happens through a channel, the accuracy and precision of information can be altered by the participants to their advantage in social interactions so as to preserve face. "The idea is not merely to try to hide the truth, or to try to convince someone of an untruth, but rather to multiply the possible situations so that negative formulations can be avoided if mutually desired."

An example of ambiguity as it pertains to me is that sometimes when talking to someone, whom I don't really want to talk to, via instant messenger, I'll reply this person rather slowly, to indicate to him/her that either I'm busy, I'm not around, there are others around me, or other construals which the person might come up with. I do this because, in this communication setting, I can, meaning that there's a large chance the other person might not attribute the reason for my slowness in replies to the fact that I don't want to talk to him/her. This preserves face for me and him/her because direct confrontation/offense is avoided.

Another example is that in text messenging, I sometimes don't reply people whom I'm upset with. This causes ambiguity in their case because they don't know (for sure) if I'm avoiding them on purpose, or because I didn't get their message.