Online chat

In this typical online chat program, the window to the left shows a list of contacts, and the window to the right shows a conversation between the user and one of those contacts.

Online chat is any direct text-, audio- or video-based (webcams), one-on-one or one-to-many (group) chat (formally also known as synchronous conferencing), using tools such as instant messengers, Internet Relay Chat (IRC), talkers and possibly MUDs or other online games. Online chat includes web-based applications that allow communication – often directly addressed, but anonymous between users in a multi-user environment. Web conferencing is a more specific online service, that is often sold as a service, hosted on a web server controlled by the vendor. Online chat may address point-to-point communications as well as multicast communications from one sender to many receivers and voice and video chat, or may be a feature of a web conferencing service.

Online chat in a narrower sense is any kind of communication over the Internet that offers a real-time transmission of text messages from sender to receiver. Chat messages are generally short in order to enable other participants to respond quickly. Thereby, a feeling similar to a spoken conversation is created, which distinguishes chatting from other text-based online communication forms such as Internet forums and email. The expression online chat comes from the word chat which means "informal conversation".

Synchronous conferencing or synchronous computer-mediated communication (SCMC) is any form of computer-mediated communication that occurs in real-time; that is, there is no significant delay between sending and receiving messages.^[1] SCMC includes real-time forms of text, audio, and video communication. SCMC has been highly studied in the context of e-learning.^[2]

History

The first online chat system was called Talkomatic, created by Doug Brown and David R. Woolley in 1973 on the PLATO System at the University of Illinois. It offered several channels, each of which could accommodate up to five people, with messages appearing on all users' screens character-by-character as they were typed. Talkomatic was very popular among PLATO users into the mid-1980s. In 2014, Brown and Woolley released a web-based version of Talkomatic.^[3]

The first online system to use the actual command "chat" was created for The Source in 1979 by Tom Walker and Fritz Thane of Dialcom, Inc.^[4]

Other chat platforms flourished during the 1980s. Among the earliest with a GUI was BroadCast, a Macintosh extension that became especially popular on university campuses in America and Germany.^[5]

The first transatlantic Internet chat took place between Oulu, Finland and Corvallis, Oregon in February 1989.^[6]

The first dedicated online chat service that was widely available to the public was the CompuServe CB Simulator in 1980,^[7][8] created by CompuServe executive Alexander "Sandy" Trevor in Columbus, Ohio. Ancestors include network chat software such as UNIX "talk" used in the 1970s.^{[citation needed]}

Chat is implemented in many video-conferencing tools. A study of chat use during work-related videoconferencing found that chat during meetings allows participants to communicate without interrupting the meeting, plan action around common resources, and enables greater inclusion.^[9] The study also found that chat can cause distractions and information asymmetries between participants.

Types

According to the type of media used, synchronous conferencing can be divided into^[2]

• audio conferencing: only audio is used
• video conferencing: Both audio (voice) and video and pictures are used.

According to the number of access point used, synchronous conferencing can be divided into

• point-to-point: Only two computers are connected end to end.
• multi-point: Two or more than two computers are connected.

Methods

Some of the methods used in synchronous conferencing are:

• Chat (text only): Multiple participants can be logged into the conference and can interactively share resources and ideas. There is also an option to save the chat and archive it for later review.
• Voice (telephone or voice-over IP): This is a conference call between the instructor and the participating students where they can speak through a built-in microphone or a headset.
• Video conferencing: This may or may not require the participants to have their webcams running. Usually, a video conference involves a live feed from a classroom or elsewhere or content.
• Web conferencing: This includes Webinar (Web-based seminar) as well. Unlike in video conferencing, participants of web conferencing can access a wider variety of media elements. Web conferences are comparatively more interactive and usually incorporate chat sessions as well.
• Virtual worlds: In this setup, students can meet in the virtual world and speak with each other through headsets and VoIP. This can make learning more productive and engaging when the students can navigate the worlds and operate in their avatar.^[10]

Synchronous vs asynchronous conferencing

Both synchronous and asynchronous conferencing are online conferencing where the participants can interact while being physically located at different places in the world. Asynchronous conferencing allows the students to access the learning material at their convenience while synchronous conferencing requires that all participants including the instructor and the students be online at the time of the conference.^[2]

While synchronous conferencing enables real-time interaction of the participants, asynchronous conferencing allows participants to post messages and others can respond to it at any convenient time. Sometimes a combination of both synchronous and asynchronous conferencing is used. Both methods give a permanent record of the conference.^[11]

Critical factors for effective implementation

There are four critical factors identified for implementing synchronous conferencing for effective instruction to the students^[2]

• Video and audio quality which depends on technical factors like higher bandwidth and processing capabilities of the system.
• Training time depends on the familiarity and proficiency of the instructors and the students with the technology.
• Teaching strategies depend on the adaptability of the instructors to the new methods, preparing appropriate and effective training materials, and motivating students.
• Direct meeting of the instructor and the students.

Synchronous conferencing in higher education

Synchronous conferencing in education helps in the delivery of content through digital media. Since this is real-time teaching, it also brings the benefits of face-to-face teaching in distance learning.^[12] Many higher education institutions offer well-designed quality e-learning opportunities. Some of the advantages of synchronous conferencing in education are:^[13][14]

• Helps the students to connect with not only their teachers and peers but also with recognized experts in the field regardless of the geographical distance and different time zones.
• Provides opportunities for both the teachers and the students to expand their knowledge outside the classroom.
• Helps students who are home-bound or limited mobility to connect with their classrooms and participate in learning.
• Helps the faculties to conduct classes when they are not able to come to classes due to an emergency.
• Supports real-time collaboration, interaction, and immediate feedback
• Encourage students to learn together and in turn, develop cultural understanding
• Personalized learning experience for the students
• Real-time discussion opportunities for students promoting student engagement
• Active interaction can lead to an associated community of like-minded students
• Saves travel expenses and time

Implementation of educational technology

The tools for implementing synchronous conferencing depend on the type of educational problem addressed. This is in turn decides the method of synchronous conferencing to be used and the tool to be used in the learning context. The tool selected addresses the problem of improving the learning outcomes which cannot be solved with an asynchronous environment. There are many tools and platforms available for synchronous conferencing.^[13]

• Smartphone applications
• Web conferencing tools
• Video conferencing tools
• Video and hangout platforms
• Shared whiteboards

The selection of tools and platforms also depends on the group size which depends on the activity for the course design.

Chatiquette

The term chatiquette (chat etiquette) is a variation of netiquette (Internet etiquette) and describes basic rules of online communication.^[15][16][17] These conventions or guidelines have been created to avoid misunderstandings and to simplify the communication between users. Chatiquette varies from community to community and generally describes basic courtesy. As an example, it is considered rude to write only in upper case, because it appears as if the user is shouting. The word "chatiquette" has been used in connection with various chat systems (e.g. Internet Relay Chat) since 1995.^[18][19]

Chatrooms can produce a strong sense of online identity leading to impression of subculture.^[20]

Chats are valuable sources of various types of information, the automatic processing of which is the object of chat/text mining technologies.^[21]

Limitations

Some limitations for synchronous conferencing in learning are:^[13][22]

• Disjointed discussions, not connected in time
• Lack of effective moderation and/or clear guidelines for learners
• Difficulty in collaborating on online projects
• Lack of proper communication with the instructor and students.
• Technical issues may arise if not analysed and planned in advance
• Lack of familiarity with the tools
• Limited time to complete the learning activity and to incorporate interactions with the learners

Social criticism

Criticism of online chatting and text messaging include concern that they replace proper English with shorthand or with an almost completely new hybrid language.^[23][24][25]

Writing is changing as it takes on some of the functions and features of speech. Internet chat rooms and rapid real-time teleconferencing allow users to interact with whoever happens to coexist in cyberspace. These virtual interactions involve us in 'talking' more freely and more widely than ever before.^[26] With chatrooms replacing many face-to-face conversations, it is necessary to be able to have quick conversation as if the person were present, so many people learn to type as quickly as they would normally speak. Some critics^[who?] are wary that this casual form of speech is being used so much that it will slowly take over common grammar; however, such a change has yet to be seen.

With the increasing population of online chatrooms there has been a massive growth^[27] of new words created or slang words, many of them documented on the website Urban Dictionary. Sven Birkerts wrote:

"as new electronic modes of communication provoke similar anxieties amongst critics who express concern that young people are at risk, endangered by a rising tide of information over which the traditional controls of print media and the guardians of knowledge have no control on it".^[28]

In Guy Merchant's journal article Teenagers in Cyberspace: An Investigation of Language Use and Language Change in Internet Chatrooms; Merchant says

"that teenagers and young people are in the leading the movement of change as they take advantage of the possibilities of digital technology, drastically changing the face of literacy in a variety of media through their uses of mobile phone text messages, e-mails, web-pages and on-line chatrooms. This new literacy develops skills that may well be important to the labor market but are currently viewed with suspicion in the media and by educationalists.^[26]

Merchant also says "Younger people tend to be more adaptable than other sectors of society and, in general, quicker to adapt to new technology. To some extent they are the innovators, the forces of change in the new communication landscape."^[26] In this article he is saying that young people are merely adapting to what they were given.

Synchronous conferencing protocols

Synchronous conferencing protocols include:

• IRC (Internet Relay Chat)
• PSYC (Protocol for Synchronous Conferencing)
• SILC (Secure Internet Live Conferencing protocol)
• XMPP (Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol)
• SIMPLE (instant messaging protocol) (Session Initiation Protocol for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions)

Software and protocols

The following are common chat programs and protocols:

• AIM (No longer available)
• Camfrog
• Campfire
• Discord
• XMPP
• Flock
• Gadu-Gadu
• Google Talk (No longer available)
• I2P-Messenger (anonymous, end-to-end encrypted IM for the I2P network)
• ICQ (OSCAR)
• ICB
• IRC
• Line
• Mattermost
• Apple Messages
• Teams
• Paltalk
• RetroShare (encrypted, decentralized)
• Signal (encrypted messaging protocol and software)
• SILC
• Skype
• Slack
• Talk
• Talker
• TeamSpeak (TS)
• Telegram
• QQ
• The Palace (encrypted, decentralized)
• WebChat Broadcasting System (WBS)
• WeChat
• WhatsApp
• Windows Live Messenger
• Yahoo! Messenger (No longer available)

Chat programs supporting multiple protocols:

• Adium
• Google+ Hangouts
• IBM Sametime
• Kopete
• Miranda NG
• Pidgin
• Quiet Internet Pager
• Trillian
• Windows Live Messenger

Web sites with browser-based chat services:

• Chat-Avenue
• Convore (No longer available)
• Cryptocat
• eBuddy
• Facebook
• FilmOn
• Gmail
• Google+ (No longer available)
• Chat Television (No longer available)
• MeBeam
• Meebo (No longer available)
• Mibbit (No longer available)
• Omegle (no longer available)
• Talkomatic
• Tinychat
• Tokbox (No longer available)
• Trillian
• Userplane (No longer available)
• Woo Media (No longer available)
• Zumbl (No longer available)

See also

• Asynchronous conferencing
• Chat room
• Collaborative software
• Instant messaging
• Internet forum
• MUDs (Multi-User Dungeons)
• Online dating service
• Real-time text
• Videotelephony
• Voice chat

References

1. Abrams, Zsuzsanna Ittzes (30 April 2003). "The Effect of Synchronous and Asynchronous CMC on Oral Performance in German". The Modern Language Journal. 87 (2): 157–167. doi:10.1111/1540-4781.00184. ISSN 0026-7902.
2. Grant, Michael M; Cheon, Jongpil. "The Value of Using Synchronous Conferencing for Instruction and Students" (PDF). Journal of Interactive Online Learning. Archived from the original (PDF) on 8 August 2017. Retrieved 23 September 2015.
3. "PLATO | computer-based education system". Britannica. Archived from the original on 17 November 2021. Retrieved 17 November 2021.
4. "DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A MULTILINGUAL CHAT APPLICATION". nairaproject.com. Archived from the original on 17 November 2021. Retrieved 17 November 2021.
5. Molly McKinney (19 November 1998). ""Sell a Couch or Make a New Friend: Broadcast Provides Potential Mind Games and Hookups." The Wooster Voice, November 19, 1998, p.8". The Voice: 1991–2000. Archived from the original on 2 July 2019. Retrieved 2 July 2019.
6. "The 'Security Digest' Archives (TM) : TCP-IP Distribution List for February 1989". securitydigest.org. Archived from the original on 8 December 2017. Retrieved 6 May 2018.
7. "CompuServe Innovator Resigns After 25 Years", The Columbus Dispatch, 11 May 1996, p. 2F.
8. Mike Pramik, "Wired and Inspired", The Columbus Dispatch, (Business page), 12 November 2000.
9. Sarkar, Advait; Rintel, Sean; Borowiec, Damian; Bergmann, Rachel; Gillett, Sharon; Bragg, Danielle; Baym, Nancy; Sellen, Abigail (8 May 2021), "The promise and peril of parallel chat in video meetings for work", Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 1–8, doi:10.1145/3411763.3451793, ISBN 978-1-4503-8095-9, S2CID 233987188, retrieved 1 November 2021
10. Gregory, Sue; Lee, Mark J. W.; Dalgarno, Barney; Tynan, Belinda, eds. (2016). Learning in virtual worlds: research and applications. Issues in distance education. Edmonton, Alberta: AU Press, Athabasca University. ISBN 978-1-77199-133-9. OCLC 930542375.
11. "What is online conferencing?". Online Conferencing. Retrieved 23 September 2015.
12. Ericson Nolasco, Clyde (1 February 2022). "Online Distance Learning: The New Normal In Education". eLearning Industry. Retrieved 30 May 2024.
13. Ozden, Sule. "Student Perceptions of Web-conferencing in Hybrid Classes" (PDF). Retrieved 25 September 2015.
14. Ferriter, Bill. "Using videoconferencing to connect your class to the world". Learn NC. Retrieved 25 September 2015.
15. "IRC Chatiquette – Chat Etiquette". Livinginternet.com. 28 November 1995. Archived from the original on 2 April 2019. Retrieved 19 January 2012.
16. "BBC - WebWise - How do I use instant messaging (IM)?". Uits.uark.edu. Archived from the original on 3 July 2017. Retrieved 1 August 2017.
17. Using the Internet for Active Teaching and Learning, Steven C. Mills Archived 19 October 2008 at the Wayback Machine ISBN 0-13-110546-9
18. "Electronic Discourse - On Speech and Writing on the Internet - 3. Internet Relay Chat Discourse". Epubl.luth.se. Archived from the original on 4 March 2012. Retrieved 19 January 2012.
19. CNET reviews - comparative reviews - chat clients - chatiquette The Internet Archive
20. Regina Lynn (4 May 2007). "Virtual Rape Is Traumatic, but Is It a Crime?". Wired. Archived from the original on 20 December 2014.
21. "Texor". Yatsko's Computational Linguistics Laboratory. Archived from the original on 1 November 2014. Retrieved 29 June 2013.
22. Anderson, Lynn; Fyvie, Barb; Koritko, Brenda (June 2006). "Best practices in synchronous conferencing moderation". The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 7 (1). doi:10.19173/irrodl.v7i1.308. Retrieved 25 September 2015.
23. Zimmer, Ben. Language Log: Shattering the illusions of texting Archived 16 February 2013 at the Wayback Machine, University of Pennsylvania, 18 September 2008.
24. Liberman, Mark. Language Log: Texting and language skills Archived 15 January 2013 at the Wayback Machine, University of Pennsylvania, 2 August 2012.
25. Zwicky, Arnold. Language Log: The decline of writing in Dingburg Archived 16 February 2013 at the Wayback Machine, www.aarichats.comUniversity of Pennsylvania. 19 September 2008.
26. Merchant, Guy . "Teenagers in cyberspace: an investigation of language use and language change in internet chatrooms." Journal of Research in Reading. 2001, Vol. 24, Iss. 3, ISSN 0141-0423.
27. Topping, Alexandra (10 June 2009). "'Web 2.0' declared millionth word in English language". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 24 October 2016.
28. Birkerts, S. "Sense and semblance: The implications of virtuality." In B. Cox (Ed.), Literacy is not enough. Manchester University Press. 1998