Transnational families maintaining bonds online, what is the best way to stay close?

Over the last decades, ways of communicating between transnational family members have greatly evolved. From handwritten letters to FaceTime, people have used different means to maintain emotional bonds from afar.

Maintaining an emotional connection with family members is challenging when migrating abroad (Parrenas, 2005). However, technology helped maintain these bonds (King‐O’Riain, 2015). In this article, we will follow the social constructivist definition of emotions as described in King‐O’Riain: “[…] emotions as discourses (words), practices (actions/interactions) and embodied experiences” (2015, p. 261). Emotional connection can be defined as the set of experiences, practices and discourses that connect people.

Digitalisation opened new ways for families to sustain their ties, especially thanks to “polymedia” – the large range of diverse platforms and ways that allow communication (King‐ O’Riain, 2015; Madianou & Miller, 2011; Parrenas, 2005; Cabanes & Acedera, 2012). The scholarship on migration, digitalisation and emotions saw a shift of paradigm in the last decade, questioning approaches and theories and suggesting a more inclusive way of looking and thinking (Alinejad & Ponzanesi, 2020). In more recent works, the practices employed by members of transnational families to sustain emotional needs have been a greater topic of interest of scholars. Two concepts are recurrent in the most recent studies: affective economies (Ahmed, 2004, as cited in Wilding et al., 2020) and digital kinning (Baldassar and Wilding, 2019, as cited in Wilding et al., 2020). Utilised together, they offer an interesting perspective on the use of digital media and the sustaining of emotional bonds. Indeed, as argued by Wilding et al., it can be understood that it is the emotional needs that drive the use of digital platforms rather than digital platforms giving birth to emotional closeness (2020). Some other scholars approach the topic differently, looking at digital means of communication as a way to sustain emotional needs (Wilding et al., 2020). That is this perspective that frames my question: how does the form communication takes ‐oral, written and/or visual‐ shape the emotional closeness between members of transnational families?

Studies situated outside of the framework of migration studies have shown that, there are differences in the usage and the emotional outcomes between the forms of online communication (King‐O’Riain, 2015; Sherman et al., 2013). Three means of communication have been discussed in the literature I reviewed: written communication, voice messages and video chat. These three forms of communication contribute to sustaining emotional bonds, but they do so in different ways and are context‐dependent (King‐O’Riain, 2015; Madianou & Miller, 2011; Sherman et al., 2013). Written messages are sometimes seen as less adequate for maintaining close links, for several reasons: they make self‐expression harder, are more prone to misunderstanding and might tend to remain at surface level (Haas et al., 2020; King‐ O’Riain, 2015; Madianou & Miller, 2011; Sherman et al., 2013). Yet, it is a good way to

communicate practicalities and minor information (King‐O’Riain, 2015). Voice messages, on the other hand, can enhance the feeling of emotional closeness as it provides cues such as voice tone (Haas et al., 2020; Madianou & Miller, 2011). Further, they often appear as convenient: easy and less time consuming (Haas et al., 2020). Finally, video calls are the type of interaction that resembles the most in‐person conversations because of its visual and verbal aspects (King‐O’Riain, 2015; Sherman et al., 2013). Sherman’s research even concluded that the level of emotional connection is not significantly lower in video chat than in real life conversations (2013). King‐O’Riain notes some limitations that come with video chat to connect with others, but they argue that it is great to fulfil the “physical need to see” relatives and spend time with them (2015). However, as Baldassar argues, video communication might not always be the form that strengthen the most transnational relationships. Depending on different elements, being apart and maintaining relationships through other means can sometimes create better relationships (2016). A range of factors come into play when we look at the effects of the forms of communication: age being an important one. For instance, a case study demonstrated that the elderly favour visual forms of communication (Baldassar, 2016).

In sum, the form online communication takes has an impact on emotional closeness. Making sense of how the different forms digital communication shape emotional closeness of transnational families takes increasing importance and is an area of study that needs to be investigated as it can contribute to a better understanding of the notions of intimacy, familial configurations and belonging

References

Alinejad, D., & Ponzanesi, S. (2020). Migrancy and digital mediations of emotion. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 23(5), 621–638. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367877920933649

Baldassar, L. (2016). De‐demonizing distance in mobile family lives: Co‐presence, care circulation and polymedia as vibrant matter. Global Networks, 16(2), 145–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/glob.12109

Haas, G., Gugenheimer, J., Rixen, J. O., Schaub, F., & Rukzio, E. (2020). “They Like to Hear My Voice”: Exploring Usage Behavior in Speech‐Based Mobile Instant Messaging. 22nd International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3379503.3403561

King‐O’Riain, R. C. (2015). Emotional streaming and transconnectivity: Skype and emotion practices in transnational families in Ireland. Global Networks, 15(2), 256–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/glob.12072

Madianou, M., & Miller, D. (2011). Mobile phone parenting: Reconfiguring relationships between Filipina migrant mothers and their left‐behind children. New Media & Society, 13(3), 457–470. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810393903

Parrenas, R. (2005). Long distance intimacy: Class, gender and intergenerational relations between mothers and children in Filipino transnational families. Global Networks, 5(4), 317– 336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471‐0374.2005.00122.x

Sherman, L. E., Michikyan, M., & Greenfield, P. M. (2013). The effects of text, audio, video, and in‐person communication on bonding between friends. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2013‐2‐3

Wilding, R., Baldassar, L., Gamage, S., Worrell, S., & Mohamud, S. (2020). Digital media and the affective economies of transnational families. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 23(5), 639–655. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367877920920278