Martin Lea

Breaching or Building Social Boundaries? SIDE-Effects of Computer-Mediated Communication

Computer-mediated communication (CMC) is sometimes heralded for its power to break down social boundaries and to liberate individuals from social influence, group pressure, and status and power differentials that characterize much face-to-face interaction. We review research conducted within the framework of the social identity model of deindividuation effects (SIDE) demonstrating that this is not always the case. When communicators share a common social identity, they appear to be more susceptible to group influence, social attraction, stereotyping, gender typing, and discrimination in anonymous CMC. Although CMC gives us the opportunity to traverse social boundaries, paradoxically, it can also afford these boundaries greater power, especially when they define self- and group identity.

Panacea or Panopticon? The Hidden Power in Computer-Mediated Communication

This article examines how interaction by means of computer-mediated communication (CMC) affects the operation of both status differentials and power relations. The authors attempt to provide a corrective to the dominant assessment, particularly within social psychological analyses, that CMC tends to equalize status, decentralize and democratize decision making, and thus empower and liberate the individual user. This emphasis contrasts with sociological critiques employing the Foucauldian metaphor of the panopticon, claiming that power relations can actually be reinforced in CMC. The authors argue that prevailing conceptualizations of influence and power within social psychology have tended to prefigure the more optimistic account, and outline a theoretical framework in which processes of “panoptic power” in CMC are given a more concrete social psychological foundation.

Computer-mediated communication, de-individuation and group decision-making

Abstract This paper discusses social psychological processes in computer-mediated communication (CMC) and group decision-making, in relation to findings that groups communicating via computer produce more polarized decisions than face-to-face groups. A wide range of possible explanations for such differences have been advanced, in which a lack of social cues, disinhibition, “de-individuation” and a consequent tendency to antinormative behaviour are central themes. In these explanations, both disinhibition and greater equality of participation are thought to facilitate the exchange of extreme persuasive arguments, resulting in polarization. These accounts are briefly reviewed and attention is drawn to various problematic issues. We provide an alternative model and explanation based on social identity (SI) theory and a re-conceptualization of de-individuation, which takes into account the social and normative factors associated with group polarization. Predictions from both sets of explanations are explored empirically by means of an experiment manipulating the salience of the discussion group, and de-individuation operationalized as the isolation and anonymity of the participants. In this experiment we were able to partial out the effects of the CMC technology which have confounded comparisons with face-to-face interaction in previous research. The results challenge the explanations based on persuasive arguments, while being consistent with our SI model. We discuss our approach in relation to other very recent research in group computer-mediated communication and offer a reinterpretation of previous findings.

Paralanguage and social perception in computer‐mediated communication

It is widely held that computer‐mediated communication (CMC) filters out many of the social and affective cues associated with human interaction with consequent effects on communication outcomes an...

Knowing Me, Knowing You: Anonymity Effects on Social Identity Processes within Groups

The Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Effects (SIDE) proposes that depersonalization of self and others is responsible for the effects of visual anonymity on group behavior. The authors investigated these mediating processes by assessing the effects of group-based self-categorization and stereotyping of others on group attraction within visually anonymous or video-identifiable groups communicating via computer. Structural equation modeling showed that visual anonymity increased group-based self-categorization, which directly increased attraction to the group and indirectly increased group attraction by enhancing group-based stereotyping of others. Visual anonymity had no effect on self-categorization in terms of a wider social category (nationality). Predictions derived from alternative perspectives that visual anonymity decreases group attraction by increasing impersonal task focus or by attenuating evaluation concerns were not supported.

Intergroup differentiation in computer-mediated communication: Effects of depersonalization.

Two studies examined intergroup discussions via computer-mediated communication systems. It was hypothesized that depersonalization, in comparison with individuated interaction, would increase the tendency for intergroup differentiation in attitudes and stereotypes, In Study 1, 24 groups communicated internationally over the Internet in a longitudinal design. Interacting groups, based in 2 different countries, were individuated versus partially unidentifiable, and thus depersonalized. Results indicate that depersonalized groups diverge, or bipolarize, when compared with individuated groups. A follow-up study demonstrated that under depersonalized conditions, individual differences are less salient, whereas group memberships are more salient. In addition, stereotypes were more salient in depersonalized conditions. Results support predictions derived from the social identity model of deindividuation effects.

Social Presence in Distributed Group Environments: The Role of Social Identity.

This paper argues that to achieve social presence in a distributed environment, it is not necessary to emulate face-to-face conditions of increased cues to the interpersonal. Rather, it is argued, that a sense of belongingness to the group, or perceptual immersion in the group, can be realised through the creation of a shared social identity between group members. From this perspective, social presence is a function of the cognitive representation of the group by group members and not the interpersonal bonds between group members. Furthermore, specific design features and characteristics of the distributed learning environment can be utilised to achieve and maintain this shared group identity. This approach, encapsulated by the SIDE model, is discussed and supported by two case studies of distributed students, each consisting of 10 groups, collaborating for a period of 5 weeks on group projects.

Computer-mediated communication as a channel for social resistance: The strategic side of SIDE

In two studies, the authors tested predictions derived from the social identity model of deindividuation effects (SIDE) concerning the potential of computer-mediated communication (CMC) to serve as a means to resist powerful out-groups. Earlier research using the SIDE model indicates that the anonymity of virtual groups can accentuate the power differentials associated with salient social identities: a cognitive effect. The present research builds on the strategic component of the SIDE model to show that CMC can also provide a channel of social support fostering resistance. In Study 1, students were more likely to express opinions normative for their group but punishable by the out-group (faculty) when CMC was available, independent of mutual anonymity. In Study 2, the authors directly manipulated the proposed mediator, social support within CMC, and showed increased willingness to express normative attitudes against out-group interests as a function of support. These studies reveal the importance of CMC as a medium for communicating and coordinating the social support central to collective action.

Social processes and group decision making: Anonymity in group decision support systems

Various social processes in decision-making groups are considered detrimental to the quality of decisions. It is often assumed that removing the ability for groups to exert strong social influence on its members improves group decisions. Group Decision Support Systems (GDSSs) are increasingly used to remedy the social faults of the decision-making process in groups. In these systems, anonymity is seen as a tool to reduce the impact of the group over its members, and therefore as the key to improved group performance. This meta-analytic review examines the assumption that anonymity in GDSSs is beneficial for group decision-making on a range of performance indicators. In 6 meta-analyses of 12 independent investigations there is no support for this hypothesis. The only reliable effect of anonymity was to lead to more contributions, especially more critical ones. An alternative model is presented to account for the findings. This model argues that performance in decision-making groups depends on the social context and relevant social norms as well as on system characteristics such as anonymity. It is concluded that the integration of anonymity into phases of group decision support does not guarantee improved performance.

SIDE-VIEW: evaluation of a system to develop team players and improve productivity in Internet collaborative learning groups

The compounds of formula I are useful in treating gastrointestinal disorders associated with antagonizing the motilin receptor. The compounds compete with erythromycin and motilin for the motilin receptor. In addition the compounds are antagonists of the contractile smooth muscle response to those ligands.