Interactivity isn’t a straightforward definition. As Rafaeli and Sudweeks put it, “interactivity is not a characteristic of the medium. It is a process-related construct about communication. It is the extent to which messages in a sequence relate to each other, and especially the extent to which later messages recount the relatedness of earlier messages.” (Rafaeli & Sudweeks, 1993) Kiousis defines interactivity as “the degree to which a communication technology can create a mediated environment in which participants can communicate (one-to-one, one-to-many, and many-to-many), both synchronously and asynchronously, and participate in reciprocal message exchanges (third-order dependency). With regard to human users, it additionally refers to their ability to perceive the experience as a simulation of interpersonal communication and increase their awareness of telepresence.” (Kiousis, 2002)
How can we Decipher Interactivity From Similar Concepts?
A neighboring concept, and one mentioned multiple times by the author in this week’s reading, of interactivity is telepresence. Telepresence is specifically defined as the degree to which users feel that mediated environments take precedence over physical environments. (Steur, 1992). One difference I noted was that telepresence is a specific perceptual outcome related to the environment. In contrast, interactivity is a broader construct covering the mechanisms of exchange and user action across multiple domains. As mentioned earlier, interactivity is defined as the degree to which a communication technology can create a mediated environment where participants can communicate and engage in reciprocal message exchanges (third-order dependency).
It also refers to the human user’s ability to perceive the experience as a simulation of interpersonal communication. Interactivity explicitly involves mechanisms such as message exchange, timing flexibility (synchronous and asynchronous communication), and the ability of users to modify the content or form of the environment. It is primarily a psychological component of the interactive experience. The author’s conceptual definition of interactivity requires human users to increase their awareness of telepresence. In this way, telepresence is viewed as a perception of a highly interactive experience, rather than an encompassing definition of interactivity itself.
Another difference I noted was that Interactivity is applied to technological structure, communication context, and human perception. At the same time, Social Presence measures explicitly the ability of users to convey their presence within the communication environment. Interactivity is conceptualized as having three principal domains: technological properties (medium structure), communication context (e.g., third-order dependency), and user perceptions (e.g., telepresence). The conceptual definition encompasses machine-to-machine communication in its first segment, which includes both technological and contextual aspects.
The overlap between these two concepts lies in their attempt to simulate or relate to interpersonal communication. Interactivity is often judged by its ability to facilitate interactions that are similar to those found in interpersonal communication. The conceptual definition of interactivity requires that the experience be perceived as a simulation of interpersonal communication. The goal of increasing telepresence (feeling “lost in the make-believe” of the mediated environment) and conveying social presence (conveying self in transmissions) supports this simulation goal, as both perceptions contribute to the feeling that a mediated experience is comparable to interacting with other human beings.
This comparison improves my understanding of Interactivity by addressing and improving the ambiguity that surrounded interactivity. I wasn’t really sure of how to define interactivity while writing this week’s blog post until I read about telepresence. This comparison provided specific, measurable indicators for interactivity through conceptual specificity. As I mentioned earlier, I find it really difficult to concisely define interactivity since it is a more broad definition and what I consider to be an ‘umbrella term’. I think comparing interactivity alongside a concept that is similar, yet noticeably different from
it is a perfect way to fully comprehend the concept and define it.
Works cited:
Kiousis, S. (2002). Interactivity: A concept explication. New Media & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/146144480200400303
Naimark, M. (1990) ‘Realness and Interactivity’, in B. Laurel (ed.) The Art of Human–Computer Interface Design . Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
Mollen, A., & Wilson, H. (2010). Engagement, telepresence and interactivity in online consumer experience: Reconciling scholastic and managerial perspectives. Journal of Business Research, 63(9-10), 919-925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.05.014
Rafaeli, S., & Sudweeks, F. (1997). Networked Interactivity. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2(4), 0. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1997.tb00201.x
Simple Explain. (2024, March 26). What is interactive media? [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dad1KrGwDak
Steuer, J.S. (1992) ‘Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence’, Journal of Communication 42(4): 73–93
GoBe Robots. (2022, May 5). What is telepresence? [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5k3WjhquFY
