[Air-l] social network migration

[Denise N. Rall]

--- Conor Schaefer <conor.schaefer at gmail.com> wrote:
> For some reason, this aspect seems "new" and unique
> to technology to a 

Conor - I think this is well explored in the personal
communication literature that covers role play,
identity theory and so on. I certainly put on a
different 'face' for each role I play - work, home,
etc.

This is from a former post, the following is their
abstract and references on the topic of computer
identity. I believe that multiple computer identities
are assumed to be fairly normal in the CMC
environment.

Bishop-Clark, C., B. Beth Dietz-Uhler, et al. (2003).
The Formation of and Adherence to a Self-Disclosure
Norm in a Computer-Mediated Setting. Social Psychology
Dept. at Miami University located in Oxford, OH, Miami
University, Ohio.

     One of the hallmarks of communication on the
Internet is the ease with which users self-disclose
(Wallace, 1999).  In Internet chats and on-line
discussion boards, Internet users reveal a good deal
of personal information about themselves, typically
with positive consequences (McKenna & Bargh, 1998). 
In a recent investigation of self-disclosure in
computer-mediated communication (CMC) settings,
Joinson (2001) found that participants disclosed more
personal information in CMC than face-to-face
settings, and did so under conditions of high private
self-awareness and low public self-awareness. 
However, it may be possible to explain those results
using the Social Identity Deindivuation Model (SIDE)
of norm formation (Postmes, Spears, & Lea, 2000),
which argues that norms emerge in groups through
referent informational influence (Turner, 1982).  The
present studies tests whether norms of self-disclosure
emerge and whether these norms are adhered to in a CMC
setting. 
Procedure 
     Students (n = 8) in an online Introductory
Psychology course participated in an asynchronous
on-line discussion as part of the course requirements.
 Students were not anonymous and had never met
face-to-face. The topic of discussion was the stigma
of mental illness.  Transcripts of the communication
were coded for number of self-disclosing (e.g., “I am
manic-depressive”) entries.  Also coded were the
number of entries supportive of self-disclosing (e.g.,
“It must be tough being manic-depressive”) and
non-self-disclosing statements (e.g., “I agree that
the mentally ill are stigmatized”), to assess the
strength of conformity to a norm of self-disclosure. 
Results 
     There were 298 entries, of which 6.4% were
self-disclosures, 1.7% were supportive of prior
self-disclosures, and 4.7% were supportive of
non-self-disclosing statements.  Correlational
analyses indicated that there were more
self-disclosing posts over time (r (296) = .22, p <
.001), more self-disclosing supportive posts over time
(r (296) = .12, p < .05), and less non-self-disclosing
supportive statements over time (r (296) = -.14, p <
02).  In an ANOVA examining the effects of time
(divided into four periods) on the ratio of
self-disclosing posts (to total number of posts),
results indicated significant effects of time on
self-disclosing posts (p < .05), self-disclosing
supportive posts (p < .05), and non-self-disclosing
supportive posts (p < .05). 
Discussion 
     Results provide support for the SIDE model of
norm formation.  A norm of self-disclosure emerged and
was reinforced by more supportive feedback for
self-disclosing than non-self-disclosing statements. 
Once a norm of self-disclosure developed, there was
pressure to conform. 
References 
Joinson, A. N.  (2000).  Self-disclosure in
computer-mediated communication:  The role of
self-awareness and visual anonymity.  European Journal
of Social Psychology,  31, 177-192. 
McKenna, K. Y. A. & Bargh, J.  (1998).  Coming out in
the age of the Internet: Identity “demarginalization”
through virtual group participation.  Journal of
Personality        and Social Psychology, 75, 681-694.

Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M.  (2000).  The
formation of group norms in computer-  mediated
communication.  Human Communication Research, 26,
341-371. 
Turner, J. C.  (1982).  Towards a cognitive
redefinition of the group.  In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social
identity and intergroup relations (pp. 15-40). 
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 
Wallace, P.  (1999).  The psychology of the Internet. 
New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.



> lot of researchers; like this doesn't happen in
> face-to-face 
> interactions, for instance. On this subject, can
> anyone point me to 
> research which does draw parallels between the two
> paradigms?


Denise N. Rall, PhD
Southern Cross University, Lismore NSW 2480 AUSTRALIA 
Tues: Room T2.17, +61 (0)2 6620 3577 Mobile 0438 233 344 
http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/rsm/staff/pages/drall/
Virtual member, Cybermetrics Group, University of Wolverhampton, UK
http://cybermetrics.wlv.ac.uk/index.html


       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC