This study aimed to gain an insight into whether computer-mediated communication (CMC) in the form of a digital forum can reflect gendered discursive practices. A great deal of research has now established that computer-mediated interactions embody gendered differences in the use of emoticons, but few studies have examined the potential effect of the gender of the emoticon-receiver on the frequency and type of the emoticons. Drawing on a corpus of 386 posts from 26 interlocutors-both male and female participants-we explored how men and women receive emoticons, not just how they send emoticons. Our analysis of the transcripts focused on coding emoticons by type and frequency of occurrence. Each instance of emoticon use was initially coded based on our own interpretation of emoticons’ potential meaning in their particular surrounding texts. Findings revealed that the male participants displayed more emoticons than the females. Moreover, gendered differences were found in terms of the gender of the addressee: Both the males and females used significantly more emoticons when interacting with interlocutors from the opposite gender.

The present study is an attempt to investigate whether online dyadic text-based discussion can help language learners develop their oral proficiency due to the fact that classroom interaction barriers have been eliminated and a less threatening, less stressful environment for learner-learner interaction has been created. A total of 30 college freshmen students at the University of Tehran participated in weekly online discussions using the ‘Yahoo Messenger’ platform for dyadic discussions during six consecutive weeks. The results of participants’ oral proficiency test showed that there was a statistically significant difference between the learners’ scores in the pre-test and those in the post-test. In addition, the results of both questionnaires and oral proficiency tests employed in the present study showed that online discussion (S-CMC) is more beneficial for the linguistically insecure and shy learners as well as those who had positive attitudes toward online discussion. Moreover, analysis of learners’ chat logs regarding the number of turns and number of words per student per session indicated that learners’ participation in dyadic online discussion was not equal. This is, in fact, in contrast to what has been reported in previous studies done in this field.

The renowned orientations of cultural models proposed by Hall and Hofstede has been the subject of criticisms. This is due to the weak, inflexible and old-fashioned nature of some designs resulting from them. In addition, is the ever-changing, formless and undefined nature of culture and globalization. Consequently, these vituperations have resulted in better clarifications when assessing the cultural anthropology of websites. Based on these later clarifications and other additions, we seek to evaluate the cultural heuristics of websites owned by agencies of the Nigerian government. Note that this is verily necessary because older models did not include Africa in their analyses. Specifically, we employed the online survey method by distributing questionnaires to different groups of experts drawn from the various regions of Nigeria. The experts employed methods such as manual inspection and use of automated tools to reach conclusions. Afterwards, the results were assembled and using the choice of a simple majority, we decided whether a design parameter is either high or low context. Findings show that websites developers tend to favor low context styles when choosing design parameters. The paper attempts to situate Africa in Hall’ s continuum; therein, Nigeria (Africa) may fall within French Canadian and Scandinavian and/or within Latin and Scandinavian for the left hand and right hand side diagram respectively. In future, we would study the cultural anthropology of African websites employing the design parameters proposed by Alexander, et al.

With the increasing integration of digital platforms in education, assessing critical writing skills in Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) contexts has become imperative—yet despite the widespread use of rubrics in language assessment, no validated instrument existed specifically for evaluating Iranian EFL learners’ critical writing in CMC environments; to address this gap, this study developed and rigorously validated an analytic scoring rubric grounded in Paul and Elder’s (2019) Intellectual Standards, engaging a robust participant pool of 236 Iranian EFL learners and 10 experienced EFL/ESL instructors to ensure both learner relevance and expert credibility across diverse institutional and proficiency levels; the rubric’s development followed a multi-phase, iterative process: initial item generation drew on theoretical foundations and empirical literature, followed by expert review for content validity, thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with instructors and learners to capture context-specific challenges and expectations in digital writing, and two rounds of pilot testing with refinement based on inter-rater discrepancies and user feedback; the final rubric comprises four theoretically and empirically coherent domains—(1) Clarity, Accuracy, and Precision (CAP), targeting surface-level rigor and expression; (2) Relevance and Logic (RL), assessing coherence and argumentative soundness; (3) Depth and Significance (DS), evaluating substantive inquiry and problem engagement; and (4) Breadth and Fairness (BF), measuring perspective-taking and avoidance of bias— each operationalized through descriptive performance levels (e.g., novice to exemplary); statistical validation employed exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to verify dimensionality, revealing a stable four-factor structure accounting for 78.4% of total variance, while structural equation modeling (SEM) confirmed strong model fit (CFI = .962, TLI = .951, RMSEA = .047), supporting construct validity; reliability analyses yielded high Cronbach’s alpha values (α = .89–.94 across subscales) and strong inter-rater agreement (ICC = .91), indicating excellent internal consistency and scoring stability; qualitative insights further affirmed the rubric’s usability, transparency, and alignment with real-world CMC writing demands, such as forum posts, blog responses, and argumentative online discussions; thus, the instrument not only fills a methodological void in EFL assessment but also serves as a formative tool that scaffolds metacognitive awareness and dialogic reasoning in digitally mediated academic writing; its contextual grounding in the Iranian EFL higher education landscape enhances ecological validity, while its theoretical fidelity ensures transferability to other CMC-based EFL/ESL settings; ultimately, the study offers language teachers a practical, evidence-based resource for evaluating and nurturing critical literacy in online environments, empowers learners with clear criteria for self-regulated improvement, and provides researchers with a psychometrically sound framework for future investigations into digital critical discourse.