2
patients. Yet, little research has been conducted on the messages exchanged within Internet support groups
(Braithwaite, Waldron & Finn, 1999; Scheerhorn, Warisse, & McNeilis, 1995; Sullivan, 1997; Wright, 1999, 2000).
Past research touted computer-mediated communication (CMC) as a medium that would foster “democratization of
exchange,” with the hope of creating a non-coercive and anti-hierarchal structure (Bashier, 1990). It was believed
that barriers common in face-to-face (FtF) communication would disappear (Spender, 1995). It is important to
systematically investigate the benefits and drawbacks of online support communities.
Interactional processes have been cast as central to the functioning and benefits derived through support
group participation. Yet, scant research has focused on group dialogue and interaction within these groups. There is
a need for research that describes, analyzes and explains the effects of communication behaviors within the support
group context (Cline, 1999). Cline states, “Ironically, a literature that attributes the benefits of social support groups
to their interactive nature is characterized by research that has systematically excluded investigation of
communication processes” (p. 532).
Cushing (1996) conceptualized CMC as a collection of sub-environments with different socio-linguistic
styles that lean to a greater or lesser extent towards the male conversational patterns. In analyzing academic oriented
online discussion lists, Herring (1993) described a male-gendered style characterized by put-downs, assertions,
lengthy postings, self-promotion, and sarcasm. The female-gendered style within academic lists was characterized
by supportiveness and attenuation such as, expressions of appreciation, community-building, and contributing ideas
in the form of suggestions. It is not known whether similar gendered styles of online communication will be
apparent within cancer support groups. According to Savicki and Lingenfelter (1996), findings in one context of
CMC will not necessarily apply to other contexts. Baym (1995) contends that the emergent social dynamics of any
form of CMC are linked to the general context, purpose and makeup of each interacting group.
Examination of discourse within computer-mediated support groups enables us to increase our
understanding of the ways in which males and females communicate support. Two reproductive cancer groups were
chosen for this investigation, the Ovarian Problems Mailing List (OPML) and the Prostate Problems Mailing List
(PPML), making sex of the patient recognizable. Cline (1999) states: “By focusing on interaction, scholars
illuminate how communication functions to create and sustain a sense of community via a worldview that binds
members together” (p. 524). Studying online interactions within these two groups is an important way to understand
the ways in which males and females build interactive supportive communities online.
Convention