Week 5 Questions and Answers

1. Based on your experience in various cyberspace venues, do you think that ‘hyperpersonal’ communication exists?  

I do think that hyperpersonal communication exists because in certain venues, such as Facebook and Second Life, it goes beyond simple text. Visuals are used to enhance the experience of communicating with other people, and this is turn helps us to create an image of ourselves to present to the virtual world, which may not always be accurate. It may not be the same face seen by people we know in the ‘real’ world. For example, when choosing an avatar in Second Life, we may choose one that is nothing like how we really are, but rather how we would like to be, and this is how other people see us online.

 

2. Do you think group memberships are important to communication in cyberspace and why?

Group memberships are important, because it gives us a sense of belonging. We become part of an online community with like-minded people who share the same interests and opinions as us, and in some cases we might not have that with people in the ‘real’ world. As a result, we seek out people who are like us and join their communities, and it can be comforting to know that we aren’t alone in the way we think about things. We can express what we really feel to these people, because we know that they feel the same as we do, and we don’t have to lie or pretend just to save face.

 

3. How are norms developed and monitored in cyberspace?

I think that norms are developed as general rules of what is and isn’t acceptable for communicating with other people. A lot of the time, it is basic common sense where to draw the line (i.e. not blatantly insulting other people in public), and has some parallel with how people should behave in the real world. These tend to be monitored by either site administrators, or in forums by moderators to enforce the rules that have to be followed.  

 

4. To what extent do the models discussed apply to graphical virtual worlds, such as Second Life? 

The hyperpersonal model allows for anonymity in SL, as people use avatars for communicating with others and don’t reveal their true selves if they don’t want to. They don’t hold back as much as they would normally because they aren’t accountable for as much sue to anonymity. In fact, most of the models discussed this week include this; people are completely anonymous in SL, and they have lower inhibitions because nobody really knows them and they may be more daring than they would be in real life. Also, people can thus create a false image of themselves.    

Week 4 Questions and Answers

1. Based on your experience in various cyberspace venues, is there, as Short et al, (1976), proposed, a lack of the presence of others when communicating and interacting online? And does this affect how you behave?

When communicating in a cyberspace venue, such as Second Life, there does feel to be the presence of others, but not in the same way as when you are talking to someone in person. You know that the other person is there talking to you, but unless you can also see them, there is a feeling of detachment there, and the feeling that it’s not ‘real’. This can influence a change in behaviour towards other people, such as saying things that you wouldn’t in the ‘real world’, because there is a lack of accountability there for what you say and do.   

2. Which of the criticisms of the 'social cues filtered out' model of Sproull & Kiesler do you find to be the most compelling evidence against its validity...and why?

The studies conducted by these two psychologists to explore the loss of social cues in cyberspace only took place between fifteen and thirty minutes, giving a very limited sample of results. It was argued that if time was unrestricted to explore this possibility, there would be no difference in the amounts of social context cues and socio-emotional expressions. The original model does not provide enough evidence for social cues, because of the time limitation.

 

3. Is the suggested increase in private self-awareness when we are online, always a healthy thing? Why?

I believe that the increase in awareness is not always a healthy thing, as it can lead to us over-analysing everything we do and say, and we may come across to others as cold and calculating. However, it also makes us more aware of what we say, and who we say it to, which perhaps then makes us more tactful. If we are more aware of ourselves, that can make it easier to communicate online, as we know exactly what we mean and what we are trying to say.   

 

4. Having been in a graphical virtual world for a couple of weeks now, do any of the theories or findings we covered in today's lecture, explain how you 'feel and think' when there?

I personally feel that none of the theories in today’s lecture covered how I feel and think when in a virtual world, but theories we studied previously do. For example, when talking to others in Second Life, I don’t feel any kind of differences between us like I do in real life. I feel like I’m on an even footing with everyone else, like my opinion is just as valid and is respected by others in the group. Also, I feel that I am a little braver in this virtual world, expressing my opinions in a way I don’t feel confident enough to in real life. I am more aware of what I say to others and I could feel their presence even though we were instructed not to talk verbally while completing the online task.

Week 3 Questions and Answers

1. How do the affordances of Facebook and pure text-based chat rooms differ? Which of these differences do you consider may have led to the death of chat rooms and the meteoric rise of social network sites?

Text-based chat rooms are purely text conversations between people, with no other forms of communication. Facebook, however, has room for images and videos to be shared between people. As for the death of chat rooms, this may be caused by the fact that Facebook can be used by people to communicate in more ways, allowing people to share more of their lives with their online friends. Chat rooms don’t allow this, so this is probably why social network sites have gained popularity over chat rooms. People probably prefer communicating in different ways, especially with people from other parts of the world that might not speak English. With pictures, it may be easier for people to communicate.

 

2. Comment on the quality of spatiality in graphical worlds and how this affordance might be related to a sense of 'immersion' and presence/co-presence.

In graphical worlds, a person would have the sense of being in a different world as long as they are there. They would feel as if they had travelled to a different place completely separate from the real world. As a result, a person may become deeply immersed in this new world and may even be reluctant to return to their own world. They would have a sense of presence in this alternate world, and it would affect their ability to function in the real world. They would end up spending more and more time in the alternate world, and would eventually lose their relationships with the people they know.

 

3. Consider which personality traits (if any) may be related to the feeling, in some, of 'deep  immersion' in graphical worlds.

A person who is deeply immersed in a graphical world, such as Second Life, may be antisocial towards the people they know in the real world, as they will be thinking of their alternate world and the friends they have there. They may get confused at times when dealing with their real lives, and be unsure of what is real and what isn’t. It could lead to mental health issues as a person spends less time in the real world.

 

4. Overview the main reasons you chose the SL avatar you did.

The avatar I chose had hair similar to mine, which is mostly why I chose it. I liked the clothing that she wears, as she has a similar style to me, so I saw some of myself in her. Also, there were a few avatars that I liked the look of, but they were already taken by the time I was choosing mine. Of the avatars that were available, the avatar I chose was the one I liked the best. I am ultimately happy with the avatar I chose for use in Second Life.    

Week 2 Questions and Answers

1. How do the current characteristics of the internet environment shape our behaviour and affect our psychology there?  

Reduced sensations - we cannot usually use any of our senses when talking to others in cyberspace. We cannot see, hear, smell, touch or taste them, so this affects how we behave towards them. 

Anonymity - we are completely anonymous on the internet and so can create false identities. This can also mean reduced accountability.   

Equalises status - everybody has a voice on the internet, regardless of status. Everybody is given the equal opportunity to put forth their ideas and opinions.

Interactions are recordable - whatever we do in real life can be recorded and put up on the internet for others to see, and any posts we make, e.g. in a forum can be seen all over the world, which can affect what we say and who to.

 

2. With reference to at least two of the noted affordances of the medium, consider how online interaction might affect our offline psychology and/or behaviour.

With anonymity on the internet, people can create false identities and not be held accountable for their actions. In real life, this could lead people to pushing the boundaries with the law and perhaps thinking that they won’t be held responsible. A person could be more willing to take risks with breaking the law, perhaps not fully realising that it isn’t like cyberspace where they could get away with it due to their false identity.

Altered perceptions mean that people could end up living in a fantasy world of their own making (i.e. Second Life) and they may become so deeply engrossed in this that they either fail to function properly in the real world or may not want to return at all.

 

3. Can creative keyboarding ever truly disambiguate computer mediated communication? Reflect on how good creative keyboarders might actually capitalize on the techniques to enhance impression management.

People with good keyboarding skills can perhaps type through conversations faster, which would impress other people and if more intelligent conversations can be carried out, the more people will want to know someone. This may help with real-life conversations; people may find it easier to talk to others, especially somebody with communication or social issues. They could become more confident in their real lives and overcome social problems.

 

4. Suggest likely technological advances in CMC and how this might change the affordances of online venues. What do you think might be the accompanying consequences on our online behaviour?

A potential advance of CMC in the future might be the possibility of using live video links throughout the entire internet, where people in forums and on email can talk to each other live and see each other. This may lead to people in cyberspace being more wary of what they say to others and their expressions will no longer be ambiguous. People will be able to see how the other person is truly feeling, without emoticons to cloud this.   

Week 1 Questions and Answers

1) How does ‘the internet’ differ from what we conceive of as cyberspace’?

The internet is defined as the hardware of a network, such as a router, that allows a person to connect to cyberspace and find information, communicate with others etc. When a connection is attempted by the user, a signal is sent out to find a response via the user’s internet provider. Cyberspace, on the other hand, is defined as the virtual world that the user ‘visits’, such as websites where they can find information and send email. Cyberspace is where they are going, and the internet is how they get there.

 

2) Does cyberspace possess the qualities of a real world space?

There are a number of similarities between these two. They both have the facility for people to meet and exchange ideas, for businesses to be run and for friendships and relationships to be born. However, there are some differences. Cyberspace is less personal, because people usually don’t see who they are talking to. But this is better for people with lower self-esteem or communication issues. A real world space is more personal. It may be easier for people to make new friends online than it is in the real world.

 

3) Does the lack of regulatory control on the internet lead a state of adaptive and productive independence or is it fostering expression of, perhaps latent toxic behaviours and danger?

The lack of regulation on the internet allows for both of these scenarios. On the one hand, there is no limit to freedom of expression and ideas can be exchanged without any kind of oppression. But on the other hand, it does allow people to say and do things that they never would if they were being monitored. But in itself, regulation on the internet could lead to a lack of civil rights, for example if innocent civilians were spied on without their consent. There is a fine line between regulation and oppression.

 

4) What do you think the future holds for cyberspace? How might it shape society in the future?

I think that in the future, more will be done online. More businesses and communication will be conducted online, which could save time and travel costs for people at work. More relationships will be started from online dating services, and it is possible that even academic lectures will be entirely conducted via the internet, e.g. on Second Life, which will also save resources.

However, it could also lead to problems in ‘the real world’. People may communicate less with others around them, choosing instead to talk to their online friends. Also, if businesses are conducted online, this could lead to job losses as people are no longer needed. But people could then find ways of making money online, to take advantage of these changes in technology.     

This is my blog for the Psychology of Cyberspace module for my university course.