Does this sentence seem friendly? Maybe not now.

Research shows that text messages that end with periods can be perceived as insincere, adding to an ongoing exploration of how people have adapted language to convey subtle shifts in tone via text.

Melanie Stetson Freeman/The Christian Science Monitor
Commuters text as they walk into and out of South Station at the end of the workday in Boston's financial district, July 7, 2010.

In most writing, ending a sentence with a period is just that – a way to finish a thought. But with text messages, where it’s often difficult to determine a sender’s intent, using a period at the end of a sentence can often seem less sincere, research from Binghamton University in New York has found.

In research published in November in the journal Computers in Human Behavior, the researchers recruited 126 undergraduate students to read a series of short exchanges that appears as text messages or handwritten notes.

After reading one version of experimental exchange, which each contained a statement followed by an invitation to the recipient  (“Dave gave me his extra tickets. Wanna come?”), the students looked at two versions of a one-word affirmative response (such as “Okay, Sure, Yeah, or Yup”), one ending with a period and one that didn’t.

The students’ responses indicated that the sentences that ended with a period were rated as less sincere, says Celia Klin an associate professor of psychology at Binghamton, who led the research, in a statement. Despite the absence of context around the exchanges, she says, students were determining the meaning behind the messages based on the punctuation used by the sender.

“When speaking, people easily convey social and emotional information with eye gaze, facial expressions, tone of voice, pauses, and so on,” Professor Klin said. “People obviously can’t use these mechanisms when they are texting. Thus, it makes sense that texters rely on what they have available to them — emoticons, deliberate misspellings that mimic speech sounds and, according to our data, punctuation.”

In a world where people increasingly favor text message-based communication over phone calls, this “overanalyzing” of what might seem like simple exchanges can have a variety of impacts, comedy writer Sam Greenspan notes in a 2011 book.

Using a period in a simple sentence like “I’m heading out to the party now,” can vastly change its meaning, he says.

“In texting, you don’t have to end a sentence with any punctuation. It’s totally acceptable to just let it dangle. So using a period gives a certain air of finality to a statement. without the period, it feels much more open-ended – I’m heading out to the party now but who knows what I’m doing later, and you just might be part of it. Periods end things. Leaving one out keeps things open,” he writes in an excerpt published in Wired.

Mr. Greenspan assigns a range of meanings to seemingly innocuous punctuation – exclamation points are either playful or desperate, “depending on the usage,” semicolons are “trying too hard.” Commas, by contrast, notes Mental Floss, citing the writer Gertrude Stein, “are servile and ... have no life of their own.”

In a follow-up study, Klin found that sentences that end with exclamation points are often perceived as more sincere compared to messages with periods. She says that as a common vocabulary for texting and online communication continues to evolve, with, for example, text in all caps perceived as shouting, people have learned to evoke the subtleties of speech in short, written bursts.

“Punctuation is used and understood by texters to convey emotions and other social and pragmatic information. Given that people are wonderfully adept at communicating complex and nuanced information in conversations, it’s not surprising that as texting evolves, people are finding ways to convey the same types of information in their texts,” she adds.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Does this sentence seem friendly? Maybe not now.
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Technology/2015/1209/Does-this-sentence-seem-friendly-Maybe-not-now
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe