Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-544b6db54f-5rlvm Total loading time: 0.392 Render date: 2021-10-16T22:29:36.443Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

2 - A SIDE look at computer-mediated interaction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 October 2011

Zachary Birchmeier
Affiliation:
Miami University
Beth Dietz-Uhler
Affiliation:
Miami University
Garold Stasser
Affiliation:
Miami University
Get access

Summary

Introduction

The new communications technologies are developing at such a fast pace that it is difficult for research and theorizing to keep up. Although exploring the range of applications and instantiations of the latest forms of computer-mediated communication (CMC), texting, and video-based phone systems provides many useful insights, research and theorizing that lag behind the technological developments will run the risk of being phenomenon- and even technology-driven, making it difficult to anticipate new uses and consequences. In this chapter we therefore adopt a theory-focused approach to make some sense of the effects of the new technologies (as Kurt Lewin said, there is nothing so practical as a good theory), and a primarily experimental methodology to test this. We focus on a theoretical framework that we have developed over a number of years to gain insights into the effects of CMC in social and organizational settings: the SIDE model. We have found this model useful in helping to correct a tendency, in the literature on CMC in particular, to underestimate the role of social influences on and within these technologies, and an equal (and perhaps opposite) tendency to overestimate their capacity to counteract the impact of status and power.

In particular, we think this theoretical model has been useful in helping us to understand (and predict) some of the more counterintuitive findings of behavior found using computer-mediated communication. The idea that people actually conform when isolated from and anonymous to their group is a good example of such an effect explained by the SIDE model. Gender, which is a key focus in the present chapter, also forms an interesting case study in this respect. Much theorizing and research has proposed that women might become more assertive and less submissive when liberated by the anonymity of CMC. Our research suggests that this is not necessarily the case. The SIDE model helps to explicate when and why the technology helps disempowered groups to transcend inequalities of status and power, and when it leaves them more vulnerable to the power divide. Of course, people are not just passively exposed to the effects of technologies such as CMC – a key argument is that they provide strategic opportunities for people to “manage” their identities contra “less mediated” face-to-face communication. So, for example, when women are given the chance to conceal or deceive their gender identity, do they do this, and if so, with what effect? And are these strategies and effects similar for other groups and categories? After outlining our model and providing some evidence of empirical support, we concentrate on the “gender divide” as one important test case, in which the social and power dimensions of these communications technologies in particular can be examined in some detail. Finally, we consider some of the implications of these findings for gender, as well as relations between groups divided by power and status in general.

Type
Chapter
Information
Strategic Uses of Social Technology
An Interactive Perspective of Social Psychology
, pp. 16 - 39
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brunsting, S.Postmes, T. 2002 Social movement participation in the digital age – Predicting offline and online collective actionSmall Group Research 33 525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Wolf, M 2002
Diener, E. 1980 Deindividuation: The absence of self-awareness and self-regulation in group membersPaulus, P.The psychology of group influenceHillsdale, NJErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Dubrovsky, V. J.Kiesler, S.Sethna, B. N. 1991 The equalization phenomenon: Status effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision-making groupsHuman Computer Interaction 6 119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fallows, D. 2005 www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2005/How-Women-and-Men-Use-the-Internet/05-Patterns-of-Internet-Use.aspx?view=all
Festinger, L.Pepitone, A.Newcomb, T. 1952 Some consequences of de-individuation in a groupJournal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 47 382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gandy, O. H.Jr, 1993 The panoptic sort: A political economy of personal informationOxfordWestviewGoogle Scholar
Haraway, D. 1990 A manifesto for cyborgs: Science technology, and socialist feminism in the 1980sNicholson, L.Feminism/postmodernismNew YorkRoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Joinson, A. N. 2005
Kiesler, S.Siegel, J.McGuire, T. 1984 Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communicationsAmerican Psychologist 39 1123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lea, M. 1991 Rationalist assumptions in cross-media comparisons of computer-mediated communicationBehaviour & Information Technology 10 153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lea, M.Spears, R. 1991 Computer mediated communication, de-individuation, and group decision-makingInternational Journal of Man--Machine Studies 34 283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lea, M.Spears, R.De Groot, D. 2001 Knowing me, knowing you: Effects of visual anonymity on self-categorization, stereotyping and attraction in computer-mediated groupsPersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin 27 526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lea, M.Spears, R.Watt, S. E. 2007 Visibility and anonymity effects on attraction and group cohesivenessEuropean Journal of Social Psychology 37 761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Bon, G 1995 The crowd: A study of the popular mindLondonTransaction PublishersGoogle Scholar
Oakes, P. J. 1987 The salience of social categoriesTurner, J. C.Hogg, M. A.Oakes, P. J.Reicher, S. D.Wetherell, M. S.Rediscovering the social group117OxfordBasil BlackwellGoogle Scholar
Olivetti, C.Petrongolo, B. 2008 Unequal pay or unequal employment? A cross-country analysis of gender gapsJournal of Labor Economics 26 621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postmes, T.Brunsting, S. 2002 Collective action in the age of internet: Mass communication and online mobilizationSocial Science Computer Review 20 290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postmes, T.Spears, R. 1998 Deindividuation and anti-normative behavior: A meta-analysisPsychological Bulletin 123 238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postmes, T.Spears, R. 2002 Behavior online: Does anonymous computer communication reduce gender inequalityPersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28 1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postmes, T.Spears, R.Lea, M. 1998 Breaching or building social boundaries? SIDE-effects of computer mediated communicationCommunication Research 25 689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postmes, T.Spears, R.Lea, M. 2002 Intergroup differentiation in computer-mediated communication: Effects of depersonalizationGroup Dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice 6 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postmes, T.Spears, R.Lee, A. T.Novak, R. J. 2005 Individuality and social influence in groups: Inductive and deductive routes to group identityJournal of Personality and Social Psychology 89 747CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Postmes, T.Spears, R.Sakhel, K.De Groot, D. 2001 Social influence in computer-mediated groups: The effects of anonymity on social behaviorPersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin 27 1243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prentice-Dunn, S.Rogers, R. W. 1989 Deindividuation and the self-regulation of behaviorPaulus, P. B.The Psychology of Group Influence86Hillsdale, NJLawrence ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Reicher, S. D. 1987 Crowd behaviour as social actionTurner, J. C.Hogg, M. A.Oakes, P. J.Reicher, S. D.Wetherell, M. S.Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory171OxfordBasil BlackwellGoogle Scholar
Reicher, S. D.Levine, M. 1994 Deindividuation, power relations between groups and the expression of social identity: The effects of visibility to the out-groupBritish Journal of Social Psychology 33 145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reicher, S. D.Levine, M. 1994 On the consequences of deindividuation manipulations for the strategic considerations of self: Identifiability and the presentation of social identityEuropean Journal of Social Psychology 24 511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reicher, S. D.Spears, R.Postmes, T. 1995 A social identity model of deindividuation phenomenaEuropean Review of Social Psychology 6 161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ridgeway, C. L.Smith-Lovin, L. 1999 The gender system and interactionAnnual Review of Sociology 25 191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherman, R. C.End, C.Kraan, E.Cole, A.Campbell, J.Birchmeier, Z.Klausner, J. 2000 The internet gender gap among college students: Forgotten but not goneCyberPsychology & Behavior 3 885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegel, J.Dubrovsky, V.Kiesler, S.McGuire, T. 1986 Group processes in computer-mediated communicationOrganizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes 37 157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spears, R.Lea, M. 1992 Social influence and the influence of the “social” in computer-mediated communicationLea, M.Contexts of computer-mediated communication30Hemel HempsteadHarvester-WheatsheafGoogle Scholar
Spears, R.Lea, M 1994 Panacea or panopticon? The hidden power in computer-mediated communicationCommunication Research 21 427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spears, R.Lea, M.Corneliussen, R. A.Postmes, T.Haar, W. 2002 Computer-mediated communication as a channel for social resistance: The strategic side of SIDESmall Group Research 33 555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spears, R.Lea, M.Lee, S. 1990 De-individuation and group polarization in computer-mediated communicationBritish Journal of Social Psychology 29 121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spears, R.Lea, M.Postmes, T. 2001 Computer-mediated communication: Social pain or social gainRobinson, P.Giles, H.The handbook of language and social psychology601ChichesterWileyGoogle Scholar
Spears, RLea, MPostmes, T. 2007 Computer-mediated communication and social identityJoinson, A. N.McKenna, K. Y. A.Postmes, T.Katz, J. E.The Oxford handbook of internet psychology253OxfordOxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Spears, R.Lea, M.Rogers, P.Van Den Besselaar, P.Ekkel, L.
Spears, R.Postmes, T.Lea, M.Watt, S. E. 2001 A SIDE view of social influenceForgas, J.Williams, K.Social influence: Direct and indirect processes331Philadelphia, PAPsychology PressGoogle Scholar
Spears, R.Postmes, T.Lea, M.Wolbert, A. 2002 When are net effects gross products? The power of influence and the influence of power in computer-mediated communicationThe Journal of Social Issues 58 91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spears, R.Wolbert, A.De Wolf, M.
Srull, T. K.Wyer, Jr, R. S. 1979 The role of category accessibility in the interpretation of information about persons: Some determinants and implicationsJournal of Personality and Social Psychology 37 1660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tajfel, H.Turner, J. C. 1986 The social identity theory of intergroup behaviorWorchel, S.Austin, W. G.Psychology of intergroup relations7Chicago, ILNelson HallGoogle Scholar
Tanis, M.Postmes, T. 2008 Cues to identity in online dyads: Effects of interpersonal versus intragroup perceptions on performanceGroup Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice 12 96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, R.Murachver, T. 2001 Predicting gender from electronic discourseBritish Journal of Social Psychology 40 193CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turkle, S. 1995 Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the internetNew York: Simon and SchusterGoogle Scholar
Turner, J. C. 1982 Towards a cognitive redefinition of the groupTajfel, H.Social identity and intergroup relations15CambridgeCambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Turner, J. C. 1991 Social influenceMilton KeynesOpen University PressGoogle Scholar
Turner, J. C.Hogg, M. A.Oakes, P. J.Reicher, S. D.Wetherell, M. S. 1987 Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theoryOxfordBasil BlackwellGoogle Scholar
Turner, J. C.Oakes, P. J. 1986 The significance of the social identity concept for social psychology with reference to individualism, interactionism and social influenceBritish Journal of Social Psychology 25 237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolbert, A. 2000
Zimbardo, P. G. 1969 The human choice: Individuation, reason, and order vs. deindividuation, impulse, and chaosArnold, W. J.Levine, D.Nebraska symposium on motivation237Lincoln, NEUniversity of Nebraska PressGoogle Scholar
15
Cited by

Send book to Kindle

To send this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Send book to Dropbox

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Send book to Google Drive

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×