[Air-L] Call for Papers: Colloquium "Rethinking the digital virtual as a regime of action, experience and relationship"

[Francesca Musiani]

On behalf of Céline Borelle:


Dear colleagues,

As part of the DREES-funded project "Digital Detox", we are pleased to
organize a one-day colloquium on "Rethinking the digital virtual as a
regime of action, experience and relationship".

The event will take place on January 28, 2025 at the EHESS (Paris). It will
open with a lecture by Lisa Messeri, Professor of Anthropology at Yale
University, on her recently published book *In the land of the unreal.
Virtual and Other Realities in Los Angeles*.

Paper proposals must be submitted by September 6, 2024.

Please find below the full call and submission details.

We are looking forward to hearing from you!

Céline Borelle for the Scientific and Organizing Committee


----



*Rethinking the digital virtual as a regime of experience, action, and
relationship *

Céline Borelle (SENSE, Orange et CEMS, EHESS-CNRS-INSERM)

Elsa Forner (CEMS, EHESS-CNRS-INSERM)

Anne-Sylvie Pharabod (SENSE, Orange)


According to Gilles Deleuze (1995), the virtual can be defined as that
which is entirely real but not actual, that which does not exist in a
concrete, tangible way. A concept first developed in philosophy, it began
to be used in the field of computer technology in the late 1980s, notably
through the term “virtual reality”, coined by engineer Jaron Lanier to
describe interaction with a simulated environment (Woolley, 1992). Since
then, it has expanded to become a means of investigating digital
applications in general (Woolgar, 2002). In particular, the virtualization
made possible by digital technologies has been the subject of anxious
questioning. Digital uses have been seen by some as symptomatic of an
attraction to the virtual that would take precedence over the real
(Jauréguiberry, 2000; Turkle, 2011) or at least be able to compete with it,
including the risk of a pathological social withdrawal of the individual
(Piotti, 2021).


This call, on the contrary, invites us to free ourselves from any normative
goal in order to question the process of virtualization, which is
constantly fed by technological developments and oriented towards the
extension of the “immersive web paradigm” in its perceptual, narrative and
social dimensions (Boullier, 2008). More specifically, it proposes an
empirically grounded study of forms of digital virtualization, i.e. the
dematerialized situations produced by the use of digital technologies. The
aim is to explore the ways in which these virtual situations engage people
and contexts, opening up possibilities of simulation, anonymity and
distance.

Without adopting a technical determinist perspective, since “the virtual
does not depend on a technical apparatus to exist” (Proulx and Latzko-Toth,
2000, p. 103)1, this call aims to take a fresh look at the forms of
virtualization made possible by digital technologies: from the
mediatization of interpersonal exchanges on the Internet to acting in
environments that are at least partially simulated thanks to what are now
called "immersive" technologies (virtual reality, augmented reality, mixed
reality), not to mention interactions with technical devices equipped with
artificial intelligence (social robots, chatbots, online avatars).


Human-machine interaction is a distinct field of research at the
intersection of engineering, cognitive science, psychology, and ergonomics.
Several social science traditions can also be mobilized to think about the
simulation of human interactions with artificial beings (Borelle, 2018).
This call therefore proposes to focus more specifically on activities
performed by humans in virtual environments, drawing attention to
situations in which bodily involvement is not obvious and can be
questioned. This choice stems from the desire to work on the notion of the
virtual by taking seriously the specificities of the system of engagement
it authorizes.

While the “material turn” in the social sciences has enabled digital
infrastructures to be brought to light, the thrust of this appeal is to
argue that digital technologies have also opened up the possibility of
engaging with dematerialized situations. The salutary questioning of the
idea that the digital world proceeds from a suspension of physical and
social constraints has led to the abandonment of the notion of the virtual
in most social science research. Our hypothesis is that this abandonment
has been too radical, and that this notion can usefully characterize
registers of action, orders of experience, and relational dynamics specific
to the digital context.


Therefore, this call proposes to reopen this notion by unfolding it as a
regime of experience, action, and relation.

Based on the synthesis proposed by Marcus Doel and David Clarke (1999),
Serge Proulx and Guillaume Latzko-Toth (2000) distinguish three approaches
to the relationship between the real and the virtual. In the first two
approaches, which are based on normative thinking, the virtual is opposed
to the real. On the optimistic side, the virtual is seen as a way of
"solving" the imperfections of the real. It allows a wealth of
possibilities to be explored. On the pessimistic side, the virtual is
subordinated to the real in a logic of 'representation'. It is seen as a
degraded copy of reality. Putting these two normative approaches in
historical perspective, it seems that we have moved, in the words of Serge
Proulx, from the "sublime" to the "ersatz". The currently dominant
narrative of the history of digitization is characterized by this dynamic
of disenchantment, from a founding techno-enthusiasm to a resurgence of
critique (Bellon, 2019; Alexandre et al., 2022).


The sociology of uses has developed by abandoning the normative perspective
in favor of a descriptive approach, which aims to understand the virtual in
its hybridization with the actual. This is the third approach identified by
Serge Proulx and Guillaume Latzko-Toth (2000). Numerous studies have sought
to challenge the opposition between the virtual and the real, to emphasize
that digital experiences are framed by the same social mechanisms as
experiences of co-presence, and to show the interactions between the
deployment of online and offline activities. The topic of “virtual
communities”, for example, has generated a wealth of literature along these
lines, from the work of Howard Rheingold (1995) to work on the
revitalization of a leisure activity such as knitting through its online
sharing (Zabban, 2016).


Sociology and anthropology have taken an interest in forms of online
sociability, particularly in comparing the rules of online and offline
interaction. Several studies have examined interactions in simulated
virtual reality environments (Schroeder, 2002), in online forums
(Beaudouin, 2016), in persistent games (Bainbridge, 2010), or in relation
to an “imagined audience” on social networks (boyd and Ellison, 2007).
These studies highlight the reconfiguration of forms of collaboration and
conventions, between netiquette (Hambridge, 1995) and playful
experimentation (Pharabod, 2021). The sociology of use has also focused on
investigating forms of “online visibility” (Cardon, 2008), the ways in
which we present ourselves on personal pages (Licoppe and Beaudouin, 2002),
blogs (Paldacci, 2006), social networks (Georges, 2009), and online games
(Auray, 2004), in particular by looking at the issue of the digital double.


This work has thus invested the digital world as a new medium for
constructing the social, the collective and the self. In doing so, the
focus on the entanglement between online and offline activities has led
sociology to gradually abandon the notion of the virtual. The normative
disqualification of the virtual was compounded by the deconstruction of its
analytical scope. In the end, sociology has done little to study the
digital virtual as such, not only as a new medium but also as a new
territory, a perspective outlined by geographical approaches to the spatial
dimension of online phenomena (Perrat, 2020). The few works that have set
out to study “the virtual for its own sake” (Boellstorff, 2008, on Second
Life) focus on persistent games, “modes of inhabiting virtual worlds”
(Lucas, 2018), the experience of a “techno-trance” (Triclot, 2016), or the
virtual funeral as a “lived spiritual event” in World of Warcraft (Servais,
2012).


The field left open has been taken over by other disciplines that have
mobilized this notion of the virtual and taken on the task of studying it
as such. Psychoanalysis has taken an interest in the metamorphoses of the
ego in the virtual age (Godart, 2016; Alcon Andrades and Tordo, 2023).
Experimental psychology has dealt with the assessment of cognitive skills,
such as the ability to drive, using virtual simulation (Milleville-Pennel
et al., 2010), or with the way people invest in their avatar, in particular
by measuring the "Proteus effect", which refers to the fact that an
individual's behavior in virtual worlds is modified by the characteristics
of his or her avatar (Szolin et al., 2022). From a multidisciplinary
perspective, a number of studies in the information and communication
sciences extend this line of inquiry to the embodiment of avatars (Amato
and Perény, 2013; Beaufils and Berland, 2022) and, more broadly, to the
determinants of immersive experience in the use of digital devices (Bonfils
and Durampart, 2013). Design has also taken an interest in the changes in
perception under virtual conditions (Vial, 2013).


The aim of this call is to take a sociological look at the digital virtual
as a mode of action, experience, and relationship. The aim is to take a
fresh look at the relationship between the real and the virtual, as well as
other pairs of terms that are often embedded in the analysis of their
articulation: real/false, simulated/authentic, fictitious/effective. The
results of sociological studies that have documented and analyzed
arrangements with reality through forms of fiction, trickery or even lies
(see, for example, Hennion and Vidal-Naquet, 2012, on the ethics of care)
could usefully be put to the test in an investigation of virtual
situations. This call for papers aims to bring together contributions that
investigate the design, engagement, and regulation of virtual situations.
As other disciplines place great emphasis on the perceptual dimension of
engagement, especially in immersive situations, we propose to explore other
dimensions as well: spatiality, temporality issues, modulations of social
sanctions, contextual plasticity, and reduction of material costs.


This call for proposals is structured around three axes, organized around
different modalities of articulation between the real and the virtual.

1. Virtual training

This axis concerns situations in which people train to act, to make a
gesture, to forge or perfect a way of doing things, in virtual
environments. These situations are characterized by challenging the
boundary between the real and the virtual by focusing on the transposition
of the virtual to the non-virtual. Here, virtual simulation is set up as a
means, with the horizon of action located outside the virtual. The
challenge is to consider the specificities of “technical repetition” in the
Goffmanian sense (Goffman, 1991) in a digital environment. Virtual training
involves suspending the test of action in a physical environment, often a
collective one. We can think of the design of virtual reality exposure
therapy (TERV) to treat military post-traumatic stress syndrome (Brandt,
2013), and the uses of TERV to treat phobias (Klein and Borelle, 2019;
Forner , 2020) and addictions (Borelle and Forner, 2024); the use of
virtual reality to acquire soft skills in the context of training (the art
of the pitch, for example, see Faustin Barbe's thesis in progress) or job
search (see the interview training tool used by Pôle emploi); learning
technical gestures in the medical context (the use of augmented reality in
surgery), in the fields of design and architecture (modeling spaces in
virtual reality), or even in the military (the use of simulators to train
fighter pilots, Dubey and Moricot, 2016); raising awareness of personal
attacks through experiences from different points of view, in the justice
system (use of virtual reality in cases of domestic violence) and in the
fight against gender discrimination, ordinary sexism and sexual harassment
(see the start-up Reverto, specialized in VR tools dedicated to human
rights).

2. Experimenting the virtual

This axis brings together situations in which the virtual is the horizon
for action. The virtual is invested for its own sake, as an end in itself.
The challenge is to analyze the way in which people play with the
boundaries between the virtual and the real, maintaining the vagueness in
order to experience its richness. In the field of beliefs, we can think of
digital religious practices (Campbell and Evolvi, 2019) or the reception of
online clairvoyance (Gilliotte and Guittet, 2023). In terms of affective
and sexual relationships, we can think of the consumption of online
pornography (Pailler and Vöros, 2017) or camsex (Béliard et al., 2021) and
pairing with avatars (Giard, 2021). In the realm of cultural and leisure
practices, we can think of online museum visits (Bernon, 2023), virtual
tourism, the experience of a symphony concert in augmented reality
(Laurent, 2023), and the use of the Pokemon Go application (Berry and
Vansyngel, 2021). In the world of consumption, we can think of visiting an
apartment in virtual reality (Ivanov and Rejeb, 2017) or the shopping
experience in virtual reality (Bettaieb, 2018). In terms of the
relationships that the living have with the dead, we can think of online
spiritualism (Georges, 2013), practices that consist of keeping the
deceased virtually alive (Julliard and Quemener, 2018), and the digital
experience of mourning one's child through "mamanges" and "papanges"
(Ruchon, 2015). In the field of mental health, we can think of therapy
experiments with avatars or online chatbots (the first ELIZA chatbot,
created by Joseph Weizenbaum in 1966, was designed to simulate a Rogerian
psychotherapist).

3. Framing the virtual

This axis covers the activities involved in framing the virtual, from its
design to its institutional regulation. We can look at how designers think
about virtual situations, how their practices have changed with
technological developments (see, for example, the history of virtual
reality headsets outlined by Michaud, 2017), how they envisage the
transposition of the real to the virtual and vice versa, how they
concretely deal with issues such as imitation2, realism and verisimilitude
(Suchman, 2016), or immersion, incarnation and digital doubling (Messeri,
2024), and how these practices give rise to debates. We can also
interrogate the activities involved in regulating the boundaries between
the virtual and the real, and in framing engagement in virtual activities
and relationships, especially in situations where the consequences of the
virtual on the real are the subject of both a problematization and a
construction of modes of reparation. We might think of the pathologization
of cyber-addiction (see Valentin Rio's dissertation in progress), the
proliferation of devices to control the amount of time spent on screens, or
the emergence of expertise on the damage done to children by screens. We
could also think of the treatment of virtual attacks, the judicialization
of cases of virtual rape and the development of psychological expertise to
support this process, the characterization of "grazing" (Adou, 2022), the
police, judicial and therapeutic management of cyberbullying (Blaya, 2011),
or the regulation of online hate speech (Castex et al., 2021).


*References *

Adou Ettien Franck-Stéphane, 2022, « Les *brouteurs *d’Abidjan », *RESET *[En
ligne], vol. 11. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/reset/4038

Alcon Andrades Barbara et Tordo Frédéric, 2023, « Jeu de rôle en ligne : un
espace de narrativité inscrit dans la mise en scène de soi et de la famille
», *L'Évolution Psychiatrique, *vol. 88, n°3, p. 443-457.

Amato Etienne Armand et Perény Etienne, 2013, *Les avatars jouables des
mondes numériques. Théories, terrains et témoignages de pratiques
interactives*, Paris, Hermès Science Publishing.

Alexandre Olivier, Jean-Samuel Beuscart et Sébastien Broca, 2022, « Une
sociohistoire des critiques numériques », *Réseaux*, vol. 231, n°1, p. 9-37.


Auray Nicolas, 2004, « Sosie et avatars dans les jeux électroniques »,
Colloque Icône-Image « L’image sosie : l’original et son double ».

Bainbridge Williams S., 2010, *Online Worlds: Convergence of the Real and
the Virtual*, Springer.

Beaudouin Valérie, 2016, « Forums en ligne : des espaces de co-production
de la connaissance et du lien social », In Martin O. (dir.), *L'ordinaire
d'internet. Le web dans nos pratiques et relations sociales*, Paris, Armand
Colin, p. 203-225.

Beaufils Kevin et Berland Alexis, 2022, « L’incarnation avatariale : de la
représentation cognitive de soi à l’appropriation corporelle numérique
», *Hybrid
*[En ligne], vol. 9. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/hybrid/2643

Becker Joffrey, 2020, « Concevoir des machines anthropomorphes :
Ethnographie des pratiques de conception en robotique sociale »,
*Réseaux, *vol.
220-221, n°2-3, p. 223-251

Bernon Marie-Laure, 2023, « Les publics de musées sur internet : une
typologie de visiteurs par leurs profils et usages des expositions en ligne
», *Revue française des sciences de l’information et de la communication *[En
ligne], vol. 27. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/rfsic/1477

Bettaieb Ghada, 2018, « Importance des facteurs d'accès dans l'expérience
d'immersion et de présence dans un nouvel environnement commercial en ligne
», Thèse en sciences de gestion, Université de Lille.

Blaya Catherine, 2011, « Cyberviolence et cyberharcèlement : approches
sociologiques », *La nouvelle revue de l'adaptation et de la scolarisation*,
vol. 53, n°1, p. 47-65.

Bonfils Philippe et Durampart Michel, 2013, « Environnements immersifs et
dispositifs numériques : études expérimentales et approches
distanciées », *ESSACHESS
*[En ligne], vol. 6. URL : https://ssrn.com/abstract=2314925

Bellon Anne, 2019, « Qu’est devenue l’utopie d’Internet ? », *Revue Projet*,
vol. 371, n°4, p. 6-11.

Béliard Anne-Sophie, Brasseur Pierre et Finez Jean, 2021, « Découvrir,
s’investir, s’arrêter - Trajectoires de spectateurs sur les plateformes de
sexcamming », Colloque « Classes sociales et sexualité », Lyon.

Berry Vincent et Vansyngel Samuel, « Ce que le numérique fait aux
promenades : publics, usages et pratiques ordinaires de Pokémon Go », In
Martin O. (dir.), *Les liens sociaux numériques*, Paris, Armand Colin, p.
121-141.

Boellstorff Tom, 2008, *Coming of Age in Second Life: An Anthropologist
Explores the Virtually Human*, Princeton, Princeton University Press.

Boullier Dominique, 2008, « Le Web immersif », *Quaderni*, n°66, p. 67-80.

Borelle Céline, 2018, « Sortir du débat ontologique. Éléments pour une
sociologie pragmatique des interactions entre humains et agents artificiels
intelligents », *Réseaux*, vol. 36, n°212, p. 206-231.

Borelle Céline et Forner Elsa, 2024, “Reality check. The issue of social
plausibility in virtual reality therapy with addiction patients”, *Social
Science & Medicine*, vol. 344.

boyd danah et Ellison Nicole B., 2007, “Social network sites: Definition,
history, and scholarship”, *Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication*,
vol. 13, n°1, p. 210–230.

Brandt Marisa R., 2013, *War, Trauma, and Technologies of the Self: The
Making of Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy*, PHD Thesis in Philosophy, UC
San Diego.

Campbell Heidi et Evolvi Guilia, 2019, “Contextualizing current digital
religion research on emerging technologies”, *Human Behavior and Emerging
Technologies*, vol. 2, n°1, p. 5–17.

Cardon Dominique, 2008, « Le design de la visibilité. Un essai de
cartographie du web 2.0 », *Réseaux*, vol. 152, n°6, p. 93-137.

Castex Lucien, Favro Karine et Zolynski Célia, 2021, « La lutte contre la
haine en ligne : de l'appel du 18 juin au discours de la méthode ». *Recueil
Dalloz*, vol. 5, p. 246.

Deleuze Gilles, 1995, « L’actuel et le virtuel », *Dialogues*, Paris,
Flammarion.

Doel Marcus A. et David B. Clarke (1999), « Virtual Worlds. Simulation,
Suppletion, S(ed)uction and

Simulacra», In Crang M. (dir.), *Virtual Geographies. Bodies, Space and
Relations*, Londres, Routledge, p. 261-283.

Forner-Ordioni Elsa, 2023, “Virtual Reality Therapy in France: A
Therapeutic Innovation Between Technology and Care”, *Culture, Medicine and
Psychiatry*, vol. 47.

Georges Fanny, 2009, « Représentation de soi et identité numérique. Une
approche sémiotique et quantitative de l'emprise culturelle du web 2.0 »,
Réseaux, vol. 154, n°2, p. 165-193.

Georges, Fanny, 2013, « Le spiritisme en ligne. *La communication numérique
avec l'au-delà *», *Les Cahiers du numérique*, vol. 9, n°3-4, p. 211-240.

Giard Agnès, 2021, « Peut-on s’éprendre de tout ? », *Terrain *[En ligne],
vol. 75. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/terrain/21985

Gilliotte Quentin et Guittet Emmanuelle, 2023, « La production individuelle
et collective des bonnes pratiques dans une activité non encadrée. Étude de
cas d’un conflit entre praticien·nes de la cartomancie en ligne »,
Sociologies pratiques, vol. 46, n°1, p. 31-41.

Godart Elsa, 2016, *Je selfie donc je suis*, Paris, Albin Michel.

Goffman Erving, 1991, *Les cadres de l’expérience*, Paris, Editions de
Minuit.

Hambridge Sally, *Netiquette guidelines*,
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1855

Hennion Antoine et Vidal-Naquet Pierre (dir.), 2012, *Une ethnographie de
la relation d’aide : de la ruse à la fiction, ou comment concilier
protection et autonomie*, Rapport pour la MiRe (DREES).

Ivanov Ivan et Rejeb Hanene, 2017, « Des dispositifs mobiles à la réalité
virtuelle : le projet immersif Immo3D au service du réseau d’agences
immobilières MLS », *Communication et organisation*, vol. 52, p. 165-180.

Jauréguiberry Francis, 2000, « Le moi, le soi et Internet », *Sociologie et
sociétés*, vol. 32, n°2, p. 136–152.

Julliard Virginie et Quemener Nelly, 2018, « Garder les morts vivants.
Dispositifs, pratiques, hommages », *Réseaux*, vol. 210, n°4, p. 9-20.

Klein Nicolas et Borelle Céline, 2019, « Réalité virtuelle et santé
mentale. La fin d’un art de faire ? », *Revue d'anthropologie des
connaissances*, vol. 13, n°2, p. 613-639.

Laurent Emma, 2023, « Étude comparée des expériences de concerts
symphoniques traditionnels et d’un concert symphonique en réalité augmentée
: une question de différenciations sociales ? », *Colloque *« Culture en
régime numérique : questionner les pratiques, catégories et méthodes »,
Paris/Aubervilliers.

Licoppe Christian et Beaudouin Valérie, 2002, « La construction
électronique du social : les sites personnels. L'exemple de la musique »,
*Réseaux*, vol. 116, no6, p. 53-96.

Lucas Jean-François, 2018, « Les figures de l’habitant dans les mondes
virtuels », *Sciences du jeu *[En ligne], n°10. URL :
http://journals.openedition.org/sdj/1353

Messeri Lisa, 2024, *In the land of the unreal. Virtual and other realities
in Los Angeles*, Duke University Press.

Michaud Thomas, 2017, « De la science-fiction à l’innovation
technoscientifique : le cas des casques de réalité virtuelle »,
*Innovations*, vol. 52, n°1, p. 43-61.

Milleville-Pennel Isabelle et al., 2010, “Consequences of cognitive
impairments following traumatic brain injury: Pilot study on visual
exploration while driving”, *Brain Injury*, vol. 24, n°4, p. 678–691.

Dubey Gérard et Moricot Caroline, 2016, *Dans la peau d'un pilote de
chasse. Le spleen de l'homme-machine, *Paris, PUF.

Pailler Fred et Vörös Florian, 2017, « Des effets aux affects : médiations,
pouvoir et navigation sexuelle en ligne », *Revue française des sciences de
l’information et de la communication *[En ligne], vol. 11. URL :
http://journals.openedition.org/rfsic/2873

Paldacci Matthieu, 2006, « Le blogueur à l'épreuve de son blog », *Réseaux*,
vol. 138, n°4, p. 73-107.

Perrat Jean-François, 2020, « Notions en débat. Le virtuel et le réel dans
la géographie du numérique », *Géoconfluences *[En ligne]. URL:
https://geoconfluences.ens-lyon.fr/informations-scientifiques/a-la-une/notion-a-la-une/virtuel-reel


Pharabod Anne-Sylvie, 2021, « Sortir avec des inconnus grâce à internet :
une manière de se faire des amis ? », In Martin O. (dir.), *Les liens
sociaux numériques*, Paris, Armand Colin, p. 143-158.

Piotti Antonio, 2021, « Corps imaginaire et corps réel : le virtuel et le
retrait social », In Vellut N. (dir.), *Hikikomori. Une expérience de
*confinement,
Rennes, Presses de l’EHESP, p. 63-71.

Proulx Serge et Latzko-Toth Guillaume, 2000, « La virtualité comme
catégorie pour penser le social : l’usage de la notion de communauté
virtuelle », *Sociologie et sociétés*, vol. 32, n°2, p. 99-122.

Rheingold Howard, 1995, *Les communautés virtuelles *(trad. Lionel
Lumbroso), Paris, Addison-Wesley.

Ruchon Catherine, 2015, « Les maternités douloureuses dans les discours
numériques », *Communication & langages*, vol. 186, n°4, p. 117-132.

Schroeder Ralph, 2002, “Social Interaction in Virtual Environments: Key
Issues, Common Themes, and a Framework for Research”, In Schroeder R.
(ed.), *The Social Life of Avatars. Computer Supported Cooperative Work*,
Londres, Springer.

Servais Olivier, 2012, « Autour des funérailles dans World of Warcraft.
Ethnographie entre religion et mondes virtuels », In Delville J.P.
(dir.), *Mutations
des religions et identités religieuses*, Mame-Desclée, p. 231-252.

Suchman Lucy, 2016, “Confinguring the Other: Sensing war through immersive
simulation”, *Catalyst: Feminism, Theory, Technoscience*, vol. *2*, n° 1,
p. 1-36.

Szolin Kim et al., 2023, “Exploring the user-avatar relationship in
videogames: A systematic review of the Proteus effect”, *Human–Computer
Interaction*, vol. 38, n°5-6, p. 374–399.

Triclot Mathieu, 2016, « Les jeux vidéo comme instruments de techno-transe
», *Social Compass*, vol. 63, n°3, p. 335–353.

Turkle Sherry, 2011, *Alone Together*, New York, Basic Books.

Vial Stéphane, 2013, *L’être et l’écran. Comment le numérique change la
perception*, Paris, PUF.

Woolley Benjamin, 1992, *Virtual Worlds. A Journey in Hype and Hyperreality*,
Oxford, Blackwell.

Woolgar Steve, 2002, *Virtual Society? Technology, Cyberbole, Reality*,
Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Zabban Vinciane, 2016, « Tricoter en public. Internet et le « *coming out *»
de la tricoteuse », In Martin Olivier (dir.), *L'ordinaire d'internet. Le
web dans nos pratiques et relations *sociales, Paris, Armand Colin, p.
37-57.