Isn't it simply because you need to introduce yourself and provide a bit of context when you write an unsolicited email? That seems to be a reasonable explanation for the two examples from the post...
I have been contacting a large group of people and many
have specifically asked if you were attending.
Many people on the contact list have specifically asked if
you are attending.
The idea of a reunion is a nice one
I think the idea of a reunion is a nice one The reason I'm writing is that I'm helping to put together a conference on [a particular topic].
As kids we were taught by our parents to avoid I, me and my in letters we wrote to our grandparents. It was (is?) seen as rude. The justification wasn't about status at all, but rather about ego. The worst offense was beginning a letter with I. At least it was in German in the '70's. Anyway, the habit stuck but lately I find myself slipping.
I actually put it to good use writing some email newsletters for a local conference where I tried to eliminate usage of I/we/etc because I felt that it was more professional.
"The idea of..." line suggests that whatever is being said is a known fact, that the reader should take it on authority, where as adding "I think" immediately makes it sound like the writer is less sure of themself and only has an opinion that they don't want to push on anyone.
I would agree with this, but this all very implicit in the post.
Dear Dr. Pennebaker:
Was part of your Introductory Psychology class last semester.
Enjoyed your lectures and learned so much. Received an
email from you about doing some research with you.
Would there be a time to come by and talk about this?
PamI see that commonly in three scenarios: 1) irc 2) from people who learn to write English as a second language 3) from people with whom I have a familiar relationship - generally rendering the pronoun unnecessary.
An example of an email I got just today:
Hi <mr-ron>,
Saw your company's ad on a taxi yesterday, checked out your product,
and was wondering who you are using for colocation.
Regards,
<person i will not be responding to>This seems even further in that direction - instead of distancing the author, it removes him entirely from the discussion.
I do agree the "self-conscious" explanation seemed like an interpretation without evidence, and struck me as incomplete. I'd guess it has more to do with intentional signalling, and that it's often conscious, even if that consiousness is not of "I"-frequency per se. That is, when writing or speaking as a supplicant, you're aware of using language that sounds "respectful" or "polite," and "I"-frequency is a feature of such language which we internalize.
Which is to say that we often write in this style because we intellectually know it's appropriate, even when we are not affectively feeling any emotion like self-consciousness or nervousness.