Psychology of Digital Media PDF

24/09/2024 There will be a little amount of statistics 75% to be frequentate (participation+homework+signatures) 50 hours in total Material: Notes and readings we will discuss in class (BB) 60 questions exams (60 questions, 60 minutes, 0.5 each, no penalty for wrong answers, you imme...

24/09/2024 There will be a little amount of statistics 75% to be frequentate (participation+homework+signatures) 50 hours in total Material: Notes and readings we will discuss in class (BB) 60 questions exams (60 questions, 60 minutes, 0.5 each, no penalty for wrong answers, you immediately get your grade) only half of the module, the other one will be with Professor Bova If you get 27+ you can ask for an oral exam to get more points but it can also get lower (optional, right after the written exam) Aim: develop theoretical knowledge about the psychological bases of digital media use Topics: Concepts: o Identity (ex. Posting on Instagram, only what you want others to see) o Relationships (How we build and take care of the relationships that we create) o Groups (belongings to specific groups, changing our behaviour, showing what’s the connection with the person you’re talking to, ex. Friends vs Family vs Colleagues) o Health (how technology affects our health) Media: o Mobile o Social media o Augmented e Virtual Reality o Wearables o Internet of Things Let’s start What’s Psychology? o Psychology is a science o Difference between everyday life and the science ▪ Every day we analyse behaviours, ours or other people’s, that’s our everyday life psychology ▪ Try to understand how people think, but this is not real psychology. o Psychology is the science of behaviour and mental processes ▪ Why a science? Because it uses scientific methods to study an object o Comparative tests on our hypothesis ▪ If your hypothesis cannot be wrong, then it’s dogma. o Example: the complexity of the self grows with age: ▪ Deciding how do I measure this (ex. With questions) ▪ To whom my questions will be directed to (Population I want to test) And then find a way to pick up the sample of the population that will represent the best At least 20/25 people for every group (ex. Men between 25-35, women between 25-35, Men between 36-45, ecc)  Sample with the same characteristics of the population you’re researching Document everything (questions, replies, parameters, process) so that if somebody replicates the experiment it will get similar results Psychology of digital media o Study of how people perceive, understand, respond and interact in the media saturated world of today ▪ Evaluation of digital artifacts (how we interact we them) ▪ Design of digital artefacts (how the structure of the software changes the way we interact with it) o Cognitive vs behavioural psychology o What’s a (digital) medium? ▪ It is an object, something that gives it a shape (visually, orally, whatever) ▪ An artefact that allows to people to overcome the limits of face-to-face communication ▪ Physical dimension + Symbolic dimension + Pragmatic dimension = medium Physical dimension: what you can see, touch, feel (ex. The hardware part of the laptop) Symbolic dimension: any object (also mediums) contains a meaning, it has to do with (cultural) rules. (ex. we know that having a phone on the table would make the other person think that we are not interested in the conversation) o It dictates the way we can or cannot use the device, the medium. o The online context allows you to do things in a different way, it has its own rules. Pragmatic dimension: to have a medium it has to be clear what you can do with it, what you are allowed to do with it. o As users we can change the rules ▪ Ex. On Twitter you could only type and had a limited amount of characters, that’s when hashtags were created from Twitter developers the way we know them know. The same thing happened with the “@”, they used it to refer to a specific person without a hyperlink or anything, and then it got implemented. ▪ So we can change the software part of the medium too, but only slowly and as a group of users o Mediums can also “die” ▪ Ex. MySpace, it misses the pragmatic dimension and the symbolic (no feeling or symbol attached to it) Similar things happened to Facebook (it doesn’t have enough of a pragmatic dimension to use it if you are a Gen Z), this is a perfect example of saying “I am part of this group” by differentiating the devices you use. What features do digital media have? (Lev Manovich – The language of New Media) o Numerical representation ▪ Made of 0 and 1 (binary code) o Modularity  ▪ Most media are made of modules, they can be deconstructed in a series of discrete parts. (ex. WhatsApp can send video, text, images ecc. But also, videos could be deconstructed into photograms) o Automation ▪ Digital media operates on their own contents automatically and without the user’s knowledge (ex. iPhone correcting the pictures you take automatically, or Teams deleting background noises). Usually, they are there to make the experience better. o Variability ▪ Media content can be re-used and modified to produce new, different variables of the same object (ex. Making a copy of a file, but one of the most variable mediums is memes) o Transcoding ▪ Two ontological levels mix in digital media: the cultural and the digital levels. ▪ A medium can be transformed into another form of medium And into a different device o Interactivity ▪ Active consumption of contents. We can create content that allows us to interact with other people. Before social media evolved, we could only deal with webpages, there was not much interaction. The media limits our behaviour, our use of medium is bound to the context (where we use the device, to communicate with whom, ex. You wouldn’t use your phone to swipe on Tinder while at dinner with your parents, so your use of the device is bound to the context you are using the device in) These characteristics will be in every digital media, but to become a medium it has to have the pragmatic, symbolic and physical dimension. Reflect on: what’s your favourite medium? Describe the physical, symbolic and pragmatic dimension of that medium with some examples. This is to realize how online and offline connect o Medium: Reddit o Physical ▪ Website/app interface (the hardware you’re using to access the website and the servers that host the platform ▪ Commenting is the main things also because the platform pushes you to use text based discussions. o Symbolic ▪ Community-driven platform, free space for people from a small niche or a big group to find other people to share ideas/questions. Search in the subreddits ▪ Sense of anonymity but also reputational system (upvotes and karma) Every sub-reddit has its own rules and norm that dictate their own users, they also have their own labels. Problem: these karma points are based on the upvotes (likes) they get and on the comments they leave, making them very biased and creating a stereotype on how the “perfect reddit user” should be like. Ex. On a subreddit based on masculinity values a misogynistic comment could be upvoted a lot, making that person gain karma points without having an acceptable behaviour. On the other hand, they are useful to self-regulate the platform and its users. o Pragmatic ▪ You can create post, comment, up/down vote, join and create new communities  ▪ Community moderation happens through upvotes and reports, influencing internally how reddit pragmatically works (a bit like twitter users) Example very similar to twitter is the AMA, people used it to say “I am an expert in this sector, you can ask me anything” and they made it a specific type of post with its own features. Also started as a text only based platform Lezione 01/10/2024 Two engines for us that drive our behaviour: o We want to belong, do things o We need to preserve our self-esteem ▪ Self-esteem as everything that makes us people Why are we on social media? o Because it reinforces our identity, it gives us good feedback. o Rules are enforced by the members of the community you are in ▪ Social media can make you “overcome your own limits”, like an introvert being able to appear less shy ▪ Social media identity is not about who you are but what you show. o Most social media are made for a specific device (e.g. Instagram on smartphones, but that can be accessed from a laptop, that is transcoding) o Algorithm is the “rule of the game” ▪ Mix between physical and cultural dimensions o When analysing social media: ▪ Take a look at the platform ▪ At how it is used ▪ How it shapes people's behaviour ▪ How people follow the platform following specific social cultural rules o We want to appear good to our own eyes and to other people’s o Segmentation is a big part of social media and it’s never perfect ▪ You choose where to be according to your social groups, the groups you belong to Ex. Instagram vs Facebook vs TikTok have different ages on average ▪ Segmentation is also geographical Chinese dude’s grandma spends a lot of time on TikTok and has no idea what Facebook is. o Humans are lazy, they don’t want to spend cognitive time and energy Define the internet as a medium Technical definition is not enough o Protocols and the infrastructure of internet Internet as a bunch of places Characteristic that we can classify internet wit: o The level of virtuality ▪ Online/Offline Online o From Millennial on, we are always connected. (not a switch) Offline Mixed reality Continuum o Virtual vs Physical reality  ▪ Augmented reality (the physical world with some kind of digital addition, close to physical more than virtual reality) ▪ Augmented virtuality (virtual world with real-life objects, closer to virtual reality) ▪ Every piece of reality or virtuality is on the continuum o Mixed reality ▪ We know always have a device, a digital element in our days. o Presence ▪ Synchronous Need to be at the same time in the same place to interact ▪ Asynchronous No need to be present at the same time ▪ Utterance presence We feel that we can communicate with another person even if there is distance and time between us and them. The message will at some point be received. Even if they are not physically in the same environment or at the same time as us. Feeling social presence without the physical or time presence o Ex. Hard to post the first comment on a blog, but if you see other people do it you feel the utterance presence and you feel more comfortable sharing. o Mode ▪ Text-based ▪ Video-based ▪ Audio-based ▪ Mixed List (Wallace, 2016) o Web sites o Source of information ▪ Quality of information ▪ Search engines o Interactivity o Derivatives ▪ Deep web (ex. Government) Not correctly indexed Specific database ▪ Dark web Authorization/dedicated software Negative uses Anonymity o Discussion forum ▪ Asynchronous ▪ Ongoing discussion by topic ▪ Organized by content/platform Specific topics of interests General o Mailing list/list services  o Newsgroup/UseNet o Reddit ▪ Different form of moderation o Chat e IM systems ▪ Synchronous Mirror to real life conversation ▪ Platform-based Private Public o Email ▪ Importance of domains (ex. Use your Icatt email to write to your professor) ▪ Multiple addresses Privacy o Blog ▪ First form of web 2.0 (people creating content on their own) ▪ Focus on a single person/point of view ▪ Original platform for influencers o Microblogging and texting apps (Twitter, WhatsApp) ▪ Characterized by the speed of diffusion of their messages (very quickly) ▪ Short form of communication ▪ Follow request not needed Virtual reality o Types ▪ Immersive (HMD, cave, iMAX) ▪ Non immersive (desktop, VR) ▪ Telepresence o Technical ▪ Simulation of a world Stimulus-response (doesn’t have to mimic the real world but it has to be intuitive) Rules of physics ▪ Input-output loop ▪ Real-time interaction o Psychological ▪ Immersion How many senses are invoked in the (virtual) world ▪ Presence Subjective Social o Technology ▪ Computer henerated ▪ 360 degrees Augmented reality o Layer of digital information superimposed on real environment o Information and response ▪ Complex experience ▪ Seamless integration needed Videos  o Synchronous/asynchronous o Non verbal/paraverbal behaviour ▪ “fake” eye contact Mobile apps o Substitute browsing ▪ Mobile devices o Screen size ▪ Generational use (big/small internet) o Localized use Robots o Type ▪ Social Language Personality Design ▪ Standard (non-social) o Function ▪ Labour ▪ Assistive o Phygital ▪ Ambient-integrated ▪ Characteristics Content awareness Embeddedness Natural language/interaction Social network o Combination of different modes of communication o No specific knowledge needed o Personal profile+ link to others ▪ Ego-centric networks (they are based on you, you are the centre of your Instagram network, you see things for you) o The choice of a SN depends on many things Functional o Informative o Social o Educational o Entertainment o Commercial o Governmental Enabling technologies o Internet of Things o Pervasive computing o Artificial intelligence o Big Data LEZIONE 3 08/10/2024 Lost slide ABOUT THE PAPER o NO METHOD or anything, looks more like a study than a scientific paper, it’s an agglomerate of other studies put together that doesn’t really give a new perspective. o Chat gpt answer: ▪ It reflects on the evolution and continued relevance of the hyperpersonal model, initially introduced to explain computer-mediated communication (CMC). The original model, proposed in the 1990s, focused on how text-based CMC allows users to manage their self-presentation and interpret messages in a way that often exceeds the effectiveness of face-to-face interactions. ▪ The paper revisits the model after 25 years, discussing how the absence of nonverbal cues in CMC—once a limitation—leads users to adapt by enhancing certain communicative behaviors. This can result in hyperpersonal interactions, where people form more intense and idealized perceptions of one another compared to traditional, face-to-face communication. Over time, the model has expanded to include newer forms of media, particularly multi-modal platforms like social media. ▪ The authors also explore how the hyperpersonal model applies to modern digital interactions, such as deceptive online relationships and romance scams. The paper concludes by encouraging further research on how social media behaviors continue to align with the model, especially as online communication environments grow more complex and multi-faceted o Better answer: ▪ Psychological Implications of Hyperpersonal Communication The hyperpersonal model argues that online interactions, particularly in text-based settings, enable users to engage in selective self-presentation and idealized perception. This creates a potential for socially desirable interactions, which may exceed the intimacy of face-to-face communication. From a psychological point of view, this suggests that individuals can manipulate their online personas to create stronger interpersonal bonds. However, this model also touches on the psychology of identity formation and self-perception, raising questions about the authenticity of these relationships. Idealized personas may lead to dissonance between an individual's real self and their online identity, contributing to psychological strain or dissatisfaction when reality diverges from expectations ▪ Cognitive Load and Media Modality: The paper acknowledges the transition from text-only platforms to contemporary, multimodal social media. While this evolution expands communication options, psychologists would highlight the increased cognitive load that comes with managing multiple modalities—text, video, images, and sound—all at once. For instance, while text-based interactions allow for greater control over message composition and interpretation, multimedia interactions may introduce ambiguity or misinterpretation. The ease of switching between platforms and modes of communication could also fragment attention and impact the depth of interpersonal connections. ▪ Boundary Expansions and Limitations: Walther and Whitty discuss the expansion of the hyperpersonal model beyond its original parameters, particularly in contexts like online romance scams. These applications illustrate how CMC can foster deception and manipulation, leveraging psychological vulnerabilities like trust and  emotional investment. Psychologists studying online behavior would view this as a natural extension of classic persuasion and manipulation tactics into the digital realm, drawing parallels with existing theories on fraud and exploitation. However, critics might argue that the model lacks specificity in addressing the complex range of psychological factors at play in more interactive, synchronous, or immersive media environments. ▪ Evolution of Social Media and Mental Health: A key gap in the paper is its limited exploration of the mental health consequences of sustained hyperpersonal communication in the context of today's highly immersive platforms. Modern social media is tied to various mental health outcomes, including anxiety, depression, and social comparison. While the hyperpersonal model offers an optimistic view of CMC, psychology has increasingly recognized the downsides of online interaction, such as the exacerbation of loneliness, cyberbullying, and the pressures of constant connectivity. A psychologist would likely emphasize the need for more empirical research on the psychological costs of maintaining idealized online personas over long periods, particularly as they intersect with social media addiction and well-being ▪ Cultural and Individual Difference The paper’s analysis seems to generalize the effects of CMC, but psychological research often emphasizes the importance of individual differences in cognitive, emotional, and social behavior. People's experiences with hyperpersonal communication may vary significantly based on factors like personality (e.g., introversion versus extraversion), social anxiety, or cultural background. A psychologist might critique the model for not fully integrating these variables, as people with higher social anxiety, for example, might gravitate towards hyperpersonal interactions precisely because of the control they offer over self-presentation. On the other hand, more extraverted individuals might not experience the same depth of connection in text-based or asynchronous communication formats. ▪ In conclusion, while the paper provides a robust review of the hyperpersonal model's longevity and relevance, a psychologist would call for a more nuanced approach that incorporates contemporary concerns about mental health, individual differences, and the cognitive demands of multimodal communication. Future research might explore how the positive effects of hyperpersonal interactions can be harnessed while mitigating potential psychological harms in an era of digital saturation. o Me ▪ It was useful and interesting, but if I would’ve been an expert in the field I don’t think I would have found it interesting, it doesn’t really give a new perspective onto it, just analyses a few recent case applying the model. Methods o The Metod section describes: ▪ Sampling ▪ Experimental design ▪ Procedures (data production) Quantitative/qualitative approach Measures  ▪ Data analysis techniques ▪ All that information that would allow you to replicate the research to obtain the same result o Methods questions ▪ Is the experimental design suitable for the research question? ▪ ls the choice of independent variables appropriate? And its levels? ▪ How were the variables operationalized? ▪ Are the measurement valid and accurate? ▪ Have all possible control measures been considered? ▪ Would it be possible to replicate the procedure with the information contained? ▪ Is the sample representative? ▪ Is the sampling mode appropriate? Results o The result section will report ▪ The results of the statistical analyses with all the numerical indications required by the analysis ▪ No comments or interpretations ▪ Numerical values can be presented with figures or tables that do not repeat what is reported in the text o Questions ▪ Do the analysis chosen meet the needs of the research question? ▪ Have the statistical assumptions been replaced? ▪ Are there descriptive values that allow you to make sense of the results? ▪ Are tables and figures correctly labelled? Discussion o Interpretation ▪ The results are linked back to previously presented theories and results ▪ Proposals for new research directions ▪ Limits and critical issues of the research o Questions ▪ How is the argument structured? Are there any obvious biases? ▪ Does the article make an effective contribution to the knowledge of the phenomenon investigated? ▪ Are there any practical implications? ▪ Ecc… Understanding a scientific article o Not always easy: ▪ It requires multiple readings ▪ You do not have an adequate background ▪ It is very complex ▪ The article is meaningless or is of poor quality Situated action theory (CAT) Cognitive approach (in opposing to behaviourism) o Started as an answer to behaviourism ▪ Those two are still the main branches ▪ Cognition means mental It focuses on mental processes that happen inside of our mind o Distributed cognition  ▪ Scientists realized that is not true that first we think and then we act (mental processes before behaviours) ▪ We use what’s around us to aid our thinking ▪ Our mental processes (how we focus on things, how we decide to act) is context dependent. Helped with the idea that there is not a sequential timing in our head, it constantly adapts. o Late cognitivism relied on embodiment ▪ Our cognition is embodied, takes part, into the behavioural process. ▪ The way we receive info from our environment contributes to our understanding on the situation and how to answer appropriately to that situation. o Suchman as first person to describe this and then Mantovani (comunicazione e identità) o How does context influence behaviour? ▪ Part of the context is material, it has a material element to it ▪ Every context has expectations connected to it ▪ We call scripts Level of interaction between individuals and context (Mantovani= o Socio-cultural context ▪ Refers to rule and norm that can be explicit or implicit in the environment What a person in a context can do ▪ Structure -> action -> history Action -> structure o Our behaviour can change the structure, by strengthening or making it weaker Structure -> history ▪ It is dynamic even though is given to us o Everyday situations ▪ Opportunity -> Interests -> Aim Interests -> Opportunity (ex. I want to learn, I have the opportunity to in this class) Opportunity -> Aim (ex. ▪ You have an objective, an aim for your behaviour, for how to interact with people ▪ You can be more aware of the possibilities ▪ Your understanding of the situation depends also on your interests and aim We change our aims according to what’s happening, we adjust our behaviour to our understanding of what is happening. That means that the way older cognitive scientist thought about our mind (thinking of a behaviour and then reproducing it). Our cognition is situated but also takes information from the knowledge we have about how these situations work o Local interaction with artifacts ▪ Any interaction you are having in a specific time and a specific place (one single interaction, very specific) Right here, right now, with this people ▪ Artifact -> user -> Actual Use Use -> Artifact o The way we use an artifact can change the artifact itself (  o The artifact tells us (users) what we can do but we can also find new ways to use artefacts, changing them. o Affordance ▪ The characteristics, opportunity that a person see in an artifact, the emerging opportunities. ▪ It allows users to see opportunities within the artifact itself Artifact -> Actual Use o Actual Use is both the use that it was intended for and the affordance ▪ Language as a meta-artifact, it is created by human and we use it to talk about other artifacts Meaning that artifacts can be symbolic o All three of this level need to be used to analyse both online and face to face interactions o Context influences our behaviour in different ways ▪ But the opposite is also true, even if you are not aware of it ▪ Our cultures are dynamics ▪ Contextual influence of behaviour: Rules and norms Clues Expectations People o That is why we cannot say that digital artefacts are neutral ▪ They represent a way of codifying the way we interact with artifacts and the way we think about things ▪ Since artifacts are human made they cannot be neutral Lesson 15/10/2024 Lost some slides because I am late oops Flaming o Seen in first experiment, there was no consequence for their behaviour. o Limited communication mode: text-based ▪ The channel wouldn’t allow social information to pass through ▪ Reduce social cues model Social information (gender, age, ecc) wouldn’t be present in the text based communication A lot of FtF communication regards who you are talking to, because that regulates the way you talk, express yourself All the social cues that they needed to regulate the communication weren’t present, they didn’t know who the other person was, so their communication was not bound to others. Everyone was at the same level, being able to “fight” with each other with no consequences, because of the limited channel this “reduced lues model” didn’t seem to represent reality, so two different model arrived (mid 90’s) o SIDIM ▪ Social identity de-identification model ▪ Lea and Spears the authors  Noticed that people were creating their personalities online Categorization theory (Tashwell, Turner) o We are constantly in this process, that helps us put ourself and other people into specific categories that help us understand the world around us. o Regarding ourselves we have two categories: ▪ Personal identity is ll the trait, attributes, qualities that we can link exclusively to others, what makes us who we are. ▪ Social identity refers to all the things to ourselves that belong to the groups we belong to (ex. Member of sports team, church, your job, ecc), it defines our social groups. From this theory the two researchers theorized that in this environment (online text-based chatting) the people couldn’t be able to express their personal identity but they would have the chance to communicate through language information about their gender, age, favourite sport team, contributing to the social identity. So other people could understand at least part of the person they have in front of them and they would regulate their communication accordingly The bandwidth of the channel still limits what people can do online, BUT even with text-based communication we are able to show who we are to other people. Problem: the experiment was a set-up, it wasn’t really online because people didn’t have access to internet. o SIP ▪ Social Information Processing Model ▪ Processing as the key word: CtC communication is not as quick and efficient as FtF communication, it doesn’t give immediate results If you give it time, then they are equal o Because of the bandwidth there was a limitation on the amount of info you could get, but in the end there is no virtual difference. Advantage of choosing which types of information we decide to share with others.  All this models (Sip, Reduced clues, SITIP) have all in common that they are limited by their medium, by the bandwidth that they were working with at the time. o Their main focus is identity o While we talk about things we convey information about ourselves, that is why we shift from talking about communication and identity, they are strictly connected. o The explicit content of communication is transient, it passes, most of the time without leaving any traces. But the implicit content remains, this image will shape the interaction we may have with those people. ▪ 1996/97 Walther published his first work that used the hyperpersonal model of communication. o Turning point for o Internet as something that can unleash the potential of communication, it allows us to do things that otherwise we couldn’t do o 25 years after: ▪ The model can’t be used for research but it can be used for interpretations of what we see happen in new digital environments ▪ Two important terms Multimodal o Different modes of communication (text, images, video, ecc) Multi mediated o Different media to communicate with the same groups (WhatsApp, Instagram, Calling, Face to Face) ▪ This is how the researchers describe the difference between the old and new technologies that weren’t present when the model was hypothesized. o Hyperpersonal moment is a good framework, maybe not the best, but it can shade some light on the interactions people are having online. o Internet is starting to become available to a lot of people ▪ Different digital environments created, experimentation happening. ▪ Scientist moved from laboratory to real life studies. (real interactions happening outside the lab, not created in a lab) ▪ People were experimenting with their identities. Reid, Bruckman, Turkle o Thei relied on the post-modern approach ▪ They thought people were experimenting with different identities, each users had a specific identity for a very specific context. ▪ They saw phenomena as gender switching (male users with female avatars et similia), they were code-switching (using different languages than the usual) ▪ Reid and Bruckman: identity playgrounds where people could experience, play with identities that were not available to them in FtF interactions. Identity workshops people could try features, characteristics before choosing if they wanted it to be part of their “real” self. o They still didn’t have social media but they o Turkle applies the mask model ▪ Social environment become stages where to play the part of a different persona ▪ Metaphor of windows:  We are seen from all the window We are obliquus: present at the same time in different environments, without our body that ties us to one place and one time. Why post-modern? o It has to do with fragmentation of identity o Pirandello as the most famous Italian post-modern, to be ourselves we need to also be another person. o Identities are spread among different environments. Situated action theory o Late 90’s: ▪ Several approaches with different ideas that don’t really have much in common with each other o Socio-linguistic approach ▪ Language we use in any context (also online) retains information about the ideological structure (gender, roles). ▪ This information we cannot avoid to communicate, because we use language ▪ We cannot escape the roles we have in society because it will be seen in the language we use. You can tell the general background of a person, also online No matter how much we want to mask our identity, language always tells something about us Changing it needs a control that we usually don’t have o Strategic approach ▪ Donath: We can use features of online environments to choose and select which elements of ourselves we want to communicate to the other person we are talking to Focus on the other person, the idea that we have about that person will guide strongly the decisions we make about the way we talk and the qualities we want to transmit to others. We want to manage the impression we make on other people. We make strategic choices (thus why strategic approach) o Online environments really help in controlling the clues we give to the other person. o These people can be real or a general audience we think is listening to us and that we have a general understanding of. ▪ We tend to see a group of people as one entity or a group of very similar people. The part of our identity that we show depends on who we think is in front of us. ▪ Situated action theory already existed at this point o Biopolitics of virtual environments ▪ Aycock We can choose to be coherent in these meaning It is politics because we can choose to or not to “conform”, so it is seen as a political act. ▪ Importance of context o Positioning theory 2001  ▪ Focus on the individual (vs the virtual environment like all the others) and the processes we are involved in. ▪ Hermans Online and offline environments We cover a lot of identities, but what hold everything together? Identities as positions o We have a repertoire of positions that refers to each one identity that is relevant at any given time (ex. Student, boyfriend, son, father) Process to decide which position is relevant and should have the task to actually talk in reality o That element is the Self. o The self has the task to choose which identity has to be played in a specific context with a specific person. o The movement to one position to the other is called positioning o Only one position or a combination of them is available for each interaction o I can acquire positions by experiencing new things (ex. Becoming a mother) o All identities are available to be played and they are chosen by the Self Dialogical Self o Because it organizes and it happens with an inner dialogue o Of course it doesn’t happen consciously. This approach tells us that the others are important, we cannot be without other people, the meaning comes from the comparison with somebody Intersubjectivity model else. Even when other people are not present, they are still in our mind. We never display all of us in interactions with other people. Real world o Because if an interaction goes badly (negative feedback) and I Our mind played my whole identity, I will be damaged by this feedback and I will have an impact on my identity and Self. d o What we show to other people is not identity but manifestation of e parts of identity that are relevant for that interaction n ▪ We call that manifestation subjectivity. t Is what we show to other people as the relevant i part of our identity that matter in those t interactions y Interactions are different from relationships; they are grounded to the here and now. Subjectivity has to do with o Appearance o Non-verbal communication o Everything that we show of ourselves. Me vs I (Intersubjectivity model) o I is the part that knows, is a subject, is active o Me is the part that is object of knowledge, is a object o The Self organizes the knowledge it has about who you are through this process  o There’s no identical intersubjectivity, the self constantly processes the info we get from our behaviour and other people ▪ You never step the same river twice ▪ You never step the same interaction twice. o Identity and self is both process and product o Intersubjectivity because you cannot have it by yourself, you need at least one other person (real or imagined) to create it. ▪ You never see subjectivity, only a mix of two or more subjectivities ▪ Sort of negotiation, we speak about objects, but we also speak about ourselves in doing so. ▪ Is not who we are, is a manifestation of who we are. o Intersubjectivity is only possible in an environment that has meanings. ▪ We use those meaning to create our identity (biopolitics of virtual environments) ▪ We call those environments places ▪ Environments that have no meanings are spaces ▪ Is the same difference between a house and a home. o This model only makes sense when connected to the situated action theory model All of this is based on wanting to be liked, wanting to be rewarded for being ourselves. Lesson 29/10/2024 Groups in VE What is a group? o Traditional psychology definition: ▪ 2 or more people ▪ Common destiny They have some kind of goals o Official vs Unofficial o Formal vs Nonformal They arrived to that by interacting with each other They have commitment toward that goal ▪ Perception of being part of the same social aggregate They share roles and norms They tend to be cohesive o sense of loyalty towards each other o Part of their social identity Common goal o Commitment Recognized as such by others o This means also being able to realise who is not part of the group (outgroup) ▪ Members influence each other They are interdependent (difference between group and social aggregate) o My actions will have impact, can influence and is being influenced by the other members of the group  o My actions, then, require adjustments. The best our actions are ▪ Members have some sort of “ritual of entry” that usually is just socializing to understand group dynamics ▪ Groups as something that is in our nature From the need to optimize life by living in communities But also the need of confirmation about who we are, we need social rewards for being ourselves Online context o Context that mirrors Real Life ▪ Ex. WhatsApp groups, they are an extension of your real life social groups o Zero-history group ▪ Members never met face to face ▪ They have no intention to meet face to face ▪ Their being part of the group is not related to what they know about each other face to face Conformity (as one of the first things that make us belong) o Groups have the ability of making their members behave the way they are supposed to o Solomon Asch ▪ Perceptual task ▪ Pressure to conform Example of the three lines and the answer conforming even if it was wrong The presence of the members is enough to apply conformity o There is no need for an explicit punishment ▪ Being seen or perceived as different it is already an “inner punishment” for ourselves. ▪ Online conformity (69%) vs Offline conformity (24%) Through conformity we are socialized as member of a specific group ▪ To this day no one was able to falsify Asch experiments What he found in the ‘40s is still true today, but only in face-to-face settings Conformity in online context: things change slightly o Potentially because of the “protection” of the screen, or because of anonymity o Studies show that even when we are part of a specific social group, we conform way less than we do in FTF Asch experiments in online settings: o Way lower level of conformity (24 vs 69) o Protection from the punishment o The choice is more conscious in case of online context (polarization) ▪ Ex. A right-wing supporter will mainly interact with people with the same ideology. ▪ Polarization is pushing an ideology at the extreme of the spectrum Once at the extreme of the spectrum, you embody the value of that group and you use external signs to show that Confirmation bias  ▪ Motivation Rejection/social punishment o Compliance, we want to be part to get positive feedback o We want to be recognized as a member Compliance is a way of conforming our behaviour without having really changed o Ex. I don’t like football, but everybody goes to the pub on Thursday for the match, so I go too and I pretend to be interested Need for similarity to group members Group norms o Sherif’s autokinetic effect experiments ▪ Convergence towards a group norms He hid the real aim of the experiment to the participants Dot of light on a screen, saying how much the dot would move (in a dark room, they are alone) The dot light was not moving, but without any other reference, it seemed like it was. On the second day they were asked to do the same, but in pairs, so they could discuss. Third day, participants would go alone in the room again Participants would report using the solution they developed with the other person the day before After 7 months, participants tried the experiment again, and the group norm they created together was still stronger than the single judgment of the individual. This tells us that o Group norms are created during social interaction o They have long lasting effect o They shape the way we behave o We move our opinion towards what is more similar to the group ▪ How does this apply in the online context? o Online context ▪ Linguistic choices Style/tone Language Motivation o Efficiency ▪ Behave in the correct way quickly and without effort o Social identity ▪ Feeling of belonging, affiliation ▪ We communicate our social identity by adhering to social norms ▪ Formation Analogue to F2F o Sometimes we carry our real world into the online one: ▪ Avatars and personal space  ▪ In online interactions people were keeping the same “social distance” as their character Two Italian people would meet online ex. In a MMO and they will stay closer than two Swedish people, even though there is not real proximity. o This is why online interactions sometimes mimic face to face norms. Explicit rules o No hate speech, harassment o Most digital environment will have a specific set of rules (usually in the “Terms and Conditions” that we never use) Implicit/unwritten rules o Learning o Observation helps us understand how to behave correctly, online as well. ▪ Norm violation Explicit correction through discussion o A member of the group corrects another on their wrong behavior o It can be ▪ Mild ▪ Violent Discussion Doxxing (when FTF, real life information is shared online to attack you) Flaming (see slides yesterday) Punishments o Unfollow ▪ More mild, you keep the connection without having that person’s post on your feed o Unfriend ▪ More aggressive, you break the bond with that person Ownership o Formal ▪ Moderations ▪ Isp, servers, etc o Internal/informal ▪ Netiquette ▪ There is also a lot of self-regulation ▪ Group polarization Tajfel’s minimal group (what is the minimal requirements for being a group?) 1980’s o Similarity ▪ Group based on thin, random elements (ex. Colour yellow) ▪ A small similarity is enough to start ingroup bias o Ingroup bias ▪ They started to perceive that their group was better than the others in the experiment  ▪ Expressed marked preferable for their members and despise the members of the other group (outgroup). o Personal tendencies reinforced by group interactions o Risky shift ▪ Subjects will have to read a scenario, where a person had to make a decision ▪ Participants will have to discuss what advice to give to the person in the scenario ▪ We usually think that decisions take in group are better because we balance out each other’s opinion ▪ That’s where the risky shift comes ▪ People were more likely to give risky advice to the person, and the group enforced the final decision. ▪ When people in a group have to give advice to a character in a scenario that requires some sort of decision (balancing out pro and cons) they would start out (as an individual) with a moderate advice, but while interacting they would shift their opinion to more risky advice. ▪ Se group interactions push to the extreme. This happens because you want to prove that you are a good member of the group How? By embodying the extreme end of a spectrum (in this case, the decision) Confirmation bias o We look for confirmation to our opinion, ideals. o Echo chamber ▪ Opinions reinforce each other in “bubbles” of people with similar ideas ▪ This happens because, especially online, we look for environments that reinforce our opinion, with people similar to us. ▪ We actively look for communities that reinforce our personality, were we feel valued and our opinion is matched. ▪ It happens more in online context because there’s less forces pushing you into groups (ex. Classes, activities like sports or clubs) ▪ Rightness, we believe that our ideas are the best ones, so having reinforce from the outside group reinforce our social identity and self-esteem. If we feel like this, we will engage more in the community, feeding the mechanism that creates echo chambers. Social comparison o Directly connected to echo chamber o We checked if we are doing good enough for the people that are around us. o It is a constant process, that is not avoidable.  o Social comparison can be biased because you keep comparing yourself to somebody who is “way above your level” ▪ The result of that social comparison will tear you down o If the social comparison happens with somebody who is “less than you”, the comparison is faulty as well. o So you should do social comparison only with people similar to you ▪ At the same time, if you only look at people similar to you, you will not really evolve with external inputs. Reinforced by social identity o Extremism ▪ Worst consequence of echo chambers ▪ Leads to violent behaviour ▪ They can be “mild” if the only stay online Most of the times, it gets carried over to F2F too. ▪ The more important a social identity is, the more we are going to want to be recognized by that group. o Language is a big part of this process ▪ From how we talk about things, you can understand ▪ Group mobilization Online activism (to change the stereotype on a group) o The online word makes things easy, but with some obstacles o Pros ▪ Anonymity ▪ Micro coordination Coordination between member of the stigmatized group to organize macro events that should help gaining back their positive social identity. o Cons ▪ Censorship If you go against the rule of the social environment, you can get censored ▪ Sustainability Your actions as an activist can not be as constant as it should be needed Important to create occasion to talk about the topic and get support, in the long term all of this cannot be sustainable o People loose attention quickly, and you will need more and more resources to sustain this o On the other hand, is the only way to get that positive social identity, so you need to consider the efficiency of the process. Negative social identity from social comparison o Belonging to groups can be negative, because some groups are not seeing well by others o We need to defend our group and our social identity o Cognitive alternative  ▪ We need to think differently about ourselves, our group, and as us in that stereotyped/stigmatized group Virtual work groups o Sharing ▪ Similar to online and FTF groups, you need people coordinating and sharing information ▪ In both cases the groups are bad at sharing information (both FTF and online) ▪ Having to make sure that every individual in the group is sharing the right information at the right time o Subgroups ▪ They create themselves more in online that in FTF situations. This subgroups have random “requirements” and go beyond normal group identity o Ex. Italians creating a group no matter how different they are when they are abroad. ▪ Social identity Ingroup vs Outgroup o Not collaborating but going against each other o When using virtual groups, you need to control the process, make sure than the subgroups are limited so a ingroup vs outgroup situation does not happen. ▪ Detriment of performance and cohesion ▪ Weak identifications Individuals don’t feel represented as much from that general group o Subgroups get more important o Status effect ▪ Not related to formal role Ex. The “leader” in the virtual group can not be the leader in real life ▪ Extreme impression (stereotypes, heuristics; re: hyperpersonal model) Based on our impression management system o Comes from the Hyperpersonal model o When we have weak social cues, all the cues we have available make a stronger impression on us o We use “shortcuts”, in this case stereotypes, heuristics, biases How to make sure it doesn’t happen? o Balance out the contribution between members o Minority opinions ▪ Sometimes it can look like there is no choice but to conform to the majority group ▪ Minorities can still have an impact on the majority, but only in certain circumstances. Member of the minority are still seen as member of the general group ▪ Consistency Members have to be consistent in expressing opinions in the same way They need to “stay strong” from the attack they receive to make them change their mind. ▪ Importance of de(localization) Location of the minority member is important  If the majority is F2F and the minority is online, makes the minority have a stronger hold on the decision process of the group o This is because in F2F is easier to talk over each other, while online you have to give space and time to the person. o It relies on norms, otherwise the F2F group could just push the other group on the side. o Brainstorming ▪ Technique to generate ideas, psychology tells us that brainstorming in F2F does not work it has unreliable results ▪ Negative F2F evidence Production blocking o You don’t have time to elaborate your idea or to elaborate the idea you are listening at o Instead of producing ideas you are “blocking” them Social loafing o Happens when some members of the group rely on other members to do the work o They know that final effort will be judged as a group, so they don’t contribute as much as they think ▪ “somebody else will do it for me” ▪ Happens in class too Conformity and fear of judgment o People don’t share ideas because they are afraid of being judged. ▪ Online brainstorming Blocking o Way less production blocking in online environments o Possibly because most of the times you are doing it by texting, so even if you don’t keep up with the process or don’t listen to others idea, you can still work on yours. Focus on pc o The screen works as a defence mechanism, if they cannot see you directly, they cannot “punish” you truly o Makes you focus on writing, so it makes the system work, because in idea generation you need time for your own idea without getting too influenced by others. LESSON 05/11/2024 Persuasion Intentional process: o You can decide if you want to Elaboration likelihood model Central route (attitude change, lasting pervasive, mind and brain change) o Motivation ▪ Ability to process  o Circumstances ▪ Where is the persuasive communicative activity happening o Noise ▪ Some things require energy and attention. ▪ Extra inputs can impact our ability to process o Output ▪ Favourable or unfavourable thought upon the object ▪ Takes a lot of time and energy to change how are mind is structured, so the outcome can be very relevant. Peripheral route of persuasion: o If we are not motivated to process the info in the message we go through the peripheral route of persuasion. o We use other types of information to be persuaded ▪ Heuristics: cognitive shortcuts. ▪ Ex. Are we physically attracted to the person? How are they talking? Do they look like an expert in the field? Expert heuristics: o Information is valid because of the person who gives it ▪ Speed ▪ Competence ▪ Reliability Number of arguments heuristics: o Overwhelming people with arguments o They won’t have the resources to elaborate the information Attractiveness heuristic: o We like pretty people. ▪ Emotional herustics Attractiveness Confusion between own’s emotions and object o We “project” our emotions on the object Object →Affective information o This has a peripheral attitude shift ▪ It is not about the message but about how it is presented o Every persuasion happening this way is temporary, subjected to change way more than the persuasion created with the central route o If we don’t have a good attitude towards the object of persuasion, peripheral cues would gain more importance. o If peripheral cues are not enough:  ▪ We will not change our minds. o Ex. Advertising relies a lot on peripheral cues You need to design your message if you want it to be persuasive o Timeline: ▪ Catch attention ▪ Comprehension Clear and simple messages ▪ Negative or positive reaction Used as a base for persuasion ▪ Persuasion Positive emotions and persuasion o Good mood decreases possibility of central route o A right amount of fear/anxiety can increase use of central route, too little/much fear/anxiety can decrease skills/motivation to use central route (defensive avoidance) ▪ Ex. Smokers, they know that the danger is there, the persuasion to stop is always there, but they “tricked” their brain to not use that central persuasion system and so to not look at the persuasive message to stop smoking. What works for smokers is social influence (making it uncomfortable and inconvenient for them to smoke) Social punishment works better than scaring o Persuade people that negative consequences are very probable for them personally Negative emotions and persuasion Three important psychology processes o Familiarity ▪ We like things that are familiar to us ▪ Mere exposure effect Mere repeated exposure of the individual to a stimulus object enhances his attitude toward it By “mere” exposure is meant a condition making the stimulus accessible to perception Support for the hypothesis consists of 4 types of evidence o Correlation between connotation of words and word frequency o Effect of experimentally manipulated frequency of exposure upon the affective connotation of nonsense words and symbols o Correlation between word frequency and the attitude to their referents o Effect of experimentally manipulated frequency of exposure on attitude. o Proximity ▪ We like things that are close to us (physically and mentally) ▪ It will also help the mere exposure effect o Similarity ▪ We like things that are not too different from us o These three elements are what close relationships are based on ELM and Advertising o Use of ELM to explain what people look in ADV messages o Advertisers try to make you use your central persuasion system, but in the end it’s mainly peripherical. WOM – Word of Mouth  o Is an oral form of interpersonal non-commercial communication among acquaintances (gossip) o WoM can alter consumers’ attitude in purchase decisions. ▪ We are talking with somebody who is close to us (familiar/proximity) and that we usually like (attractiveness) ▪ So we trust those people, we trust their opinions and we get influenced by them ▪ Observe how the processes are always the same Online we have EWOm o Electronic word of mouth (digital version of word of mouth) ▪ Only possible with social media. ▪ Ex. Amazon reviews: since we are buying something, a person that has already bought it is seen as similar to us (we can trust them). This is an illusion; this similarity does not exist and its only in our mind. People rely on weak clues to make connections with people While WOM is F2F, so limited in the number of people, EWOM is a many- to-many communication, so it can involve many people that may or may not interact together, but the availability is there. Wom is fleeting, while EWOM is more stable, not linked to a specific physical context and can be constantly accessed. o It can be anonymous, while WOM is always related to your person. ▪ EWOM has very specific objectives that are usually not present in WOM. It is a more specific type of behaviour, you want to convince somebody to buy or not buying a product (ex. Maps review) ▪ https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08874417.2017.1320953#d1e247 o Effects of EWom o Motivations for Ewom ▪ Service quality is the main one (90% of bad experiences leave reviews) It is linked to satisfaction ▪ Feeling of having to help others ▪ How much you feel a part of a specific group o Source credibility and user relevance increase EWOM persuasion ▪ Ex. Reviewer hierarchy to increase power of persuasion (ex. Local Guide on Maps)  ▪ They play on similarity (ex. Amazon, “people that purchased this also like this”) They make more evident that someone like you also liked other products o Increase persuasion, feeling of belonging Design tricks that can be used to work on the elaboration likelihood model o Ex. Ryanair trying to sell you extras ELM and Influencer marketing o The social media influencer is an entrepreneur who funds their venture and creates financial wealth by promoting knowledge, competence and abilities in their chosen interest o Linguistic style over content expertise and production quality, concreteness, preciseness, interactivity ▪ They need to appear competent rather than being competent o The traditionally central and peripherical routes to persuasion are “reversed” in the context of successful influencers ▪ Content and production expertise are not central. Emotional contagion, language concreteness and closeness create viewer connections ▪ Expert vs non expert viewers More expert viewers can understand the actual knowledge that the influencer has Otherwise you will be engaged in the peripherical route. ▪ Medium: video vs written Tutorials or other things rely on central persuasion, while other type of content is more peripherical related. ▪ It is also true that we consume social media in a distracted way, leading us to peripherical use more than conscious one. o ELM and disinformation ▪ Disinformation is the “deliberate creation and sharing of false and or manipulated information that is intended to deceive and mislead audiences, either for the purpose of causing harm, or for political, personal or financial gain” (house of Commons, 2019) ▪ Scope: political influence, increasing group polarisation, reducing trust, and generally undermining civil society ▪ Exposure to disinformation can lead to attitude change ▪ Sharing/interact with fake news = been persuaded to do so by its originators ▪ When sharing information on social media occurs, it is likely to be spontaneous and rapid, rather than being a considered action that people spend time deliberating over Individuals choices to share, like and so on will be guided primarily by heuristics or contextual cues. We are not really processing the information. ▪ Heuristics to disinformation Consistency o Is the extent to which sharing would be consistent with past behaviours or beliefs of the individual ▪ People prefer to behave in ways consistent with their attitudes (confirmation bias) Consensus o Is the extent to which people think their behaviour would be consistent with that of most other people  ▪ Seeing a message that has already been shared widely might make people more likely to forward it themselves “social proof” is widely used in online commerce in attempts to persuade consumers to purchase goods or services (ex. By displaying reviews) ▪ The feedback mechanism of social networks can be manipulated to create an illusion of such social support ▪ Use of bots to stimulate social proof Authority o Is the extent to which the communication appears to come from a credible, trustworthy source ▪ Ex. Fake headlines, fake newspaper similar to real ones. ▪ Other factors to disinformation Personal characteristics o Digital media literacy ▪ Older and younger generations as the worst, one because they are very naïve (older) and the others because they don’t really know what’s happening behind the scenes (younger) o Personality (need for recognition) o CRAAP test ▪ Currency: The timeliness of the information. When was the information published or posted? Revised or updated? Does your topic require current information, or will older sources work as well? ▪ Relevance: The importance of the information for your needs. Does the information relate to your topic or answer your question? Who is the intended audience? / an appropriate level? ▪ Authority: The source of the information. Who is the author/publisher/source/sponsor? What are the author's credentials or organizational affiliations? Is the author qualified to write on the topic? / contact information? ▪ Accuracy: The reliability, truthfulness and correctness of the content. Where does the information come from? / supported by evidence? Has the information been reviewed or refereed? Does the language or tone seem unbiased and free of emotion? ▪ Purpose: The reason the information exists. What is the purpose of the information? Is it to inform, teach, sell, entertain or persuade? Does the point of view appear objective and impartial? Are there political, religious, institutional or personal biases? Resist to persuasion o Awareness ▪ Being conscious. o Immunization ▪ Same idea of vaccines ▪ You give a persuasive message to people, that they need to understand.  ▪ Giving people more and more persuasive messages but also the tools to understand that they are being persuaded LEZIONE 12/11/2024 Close Relationships (romantic love, friendships) Interdependent and close relationships o Interdependence: influence between partners on thoughts, feelings, actions o Close relationships: sense of unity and fusion with the other person, especially in romantic relationships. Attraction o Humans as social animals: ▪ We recognize others as positive or negative for us (for our survival), as a person and as species Idea of “survival” changed in the years ▪ We are attracted to people because they are there, they were there first before everybody else. o Proximity effect ▪ The more we see and interact with a person, the more probable it is that they will become our friend Dorm experiment o The further away people slept in a dorm, the less they were likely to be friends. o Physical proximity and psycho-functional distance ▪ psycho-functional distance: (occupying the same functional spaces we occupy, like churches or sport clubs) It serves psychological needs and create psychological proximity ▪ Closed-field You don’t choose with whom to be (ex. School) Filled with people who not necessarily want to be there ▪ Open-field Places we decide according to our needs/interests Places are filled with people who decided to be there, thus having similarity to us ion terms of psychological needs o Online proximity: intersection frequency ▪ It reflects how often you run into that other person on the net Frequently by participating in the same discussion forum, commenting on the same articles, or playing the same online game at the same time Recognition by “weak” cues: e.g. Nicknames, icons, avatars etc o By recognizing they will become familiar and we will like them more and more. o Then we will start talking and similarity will come o Similarity ▪ Similar interests, attitudes, background, personality You need common features with other people, we want to be familiar with our partner, what’s more familiar than ourselves? ▪ The more similar, the better ▪ Based on: Attitudes: all we know about a person’s opinions Background: age, social class, etc  Personality Communicative and interpersonal style: how similar a person is to us in the way they think about people Situation: we choose to be in specific situations, and so do other people Time: we do the same experiences (same context, same situations that shape us) ▪ We like similarity because: The desire to be liked Inferences o Interpretations on their behaviour are more accurate Validation ▪ Similarity online: We might learn about a person from what they share, we know little about them shared attituded on an object are often the only thing we know, so we seem to match 100% in attitudes In F2F, we have many cues to draw assumption on the proportion of shared attitudes will likely drop. So similarity online is enhanced, we have shared attitudes in the same online context, but most of the time, these common ways of seeing things is just an illusion. o Reciprocity ▪ Knowing that the other person likes us influence the level of attraction we have on them ▪ Self-fulfilling prophecy ▪ Reciprocity online Likes, comments, shares give people a sense of validation: positive attention Ease of dismissal (ghosting) o It is so easy to drop out of an interaction and enter another o Physical appearance ▪ Influences the way we deal with relationships ▪ How an appealing physical appearance is determined Influence of media Shared set of criteria to define beauty Beauty – female: o Big eyes o Small nose o Hogh cheek bones o High brow o Dilated pupils o Smile Beauty male o Big eyes o High cheek bones o Strong chin o Smile Common elements of beauty o Big eyes  o Smile Beauty is: o Cross-cultural and cross-gender: different ethnicities and genders agree on physical characteristics that make up an attractive human o Familiarity: we like what we know. We consider beautiful who is close to the average of the species. Beauty as a stereotype: o We associate traits: what is attractive is also good (bias) ▪ Social competence ▪ Self-fulfilling prophecy ▪ Associates “good” traits change across cultures ▪ Physical appearance online An attractive photo on social media will lead viewers to believe that the profile owner has many other positive traits (confidence, warmth, intelligence, and popularity) Popularity: o The number of friends, the number of wall posts by other people and the number of thumbnail photos of friends ▪ The “popular” profile owners showed between 330 and 340 friends, and they were tagged in many of the photos on the site ▪ For wall posts the “popular” profiles included two posts written by the owner, and five added by others. ▪ Social cues: using weak indicators to confirm our ideas (ex. This person is cool and is right before they get lots of likes) Self-disclosure: o People are more inclined toward self-disclosure in certain online environments compared with face to face settings. o Tendency for people to disclose more when they are typing on a keyboard; even when they know someone will be reading what they say, is an important ingredient in interpersonal attraction: disinhibition and anonymity ▪ Since we our anonymous we feel like our behaviour is less connected to others o The one who shares more is considered more attractive o Exchange theory ▪ Works for buying behaviour and relationships ▪ We look to maximize our wins and minimize our losses in relationships Rewards and costs