SUAVIQNight one
← The evidence registry
Research

Online Pauses and Silence: Chronemic Expectancy Violations in Written Computer-Mediated Communication

Kalman & Rafaeli (2011) · Communication Research, 38(1)

Relied on in 1 place across the academy · 1 stated limit

Read the paper ↗

What it found

When managers judged job candidates who answered an email after a day, two weeks, or not at all, the same delay was read differently depending on the candidate's standing — the pause took its meaning from what the reader already thought of the sender.

What it does not show

Managers rating job candidates over email, with delays of a day, two weeks, and silence beyond a month. It shows the effect of a delay depends on the sender's standing with the reader. It says nothing about texting between people who are attracted to each other.

And where we carry it further

Managers and job candidates over email, not two people who like each other. What transfers is only that a delay has no fixed meaning; the reader gives it one.

Where we rely on it

1 place in the academy. If this paper turned out to be wrong, this is the list that would have to change. Some of the instructions below are part of Gold; none of the findings are.

Cited alongside it

Papers that sit under the same topics and films. Not a claim that they agree with each other — only that the same exercises lean on both.

Research

A real study. We tell you what it found, how many people were in it, and what it can't prove.

Free to read, link to and quote. If we have carried this paper further than it goes, say so at contact@suaviq.com — corrections to this registry are the most useful mail we get.