3. ‘Sad, Lonely World Discovered in
Cyberspace’
The HomeNet Project (Kraut et al, 1998)
93 families in Pittsburgh, USA
Monitored Internet use during their first year online
Questionnaires focussing on psychological well
being
Interviewed participants about their use
Greater Internet use associated with significant
Declines in social involvement (the size of their
social networks)
Increases in loneliness
Increases in depression
4. Pseudocommunity
Inauthentic forms of community
involvement brought about by
increasing industrialisation and
urbanisation (Beninger, 1987)
Members of developed societies
are essentially ‘bowling alone’
(Putnam, 2000) – not
participating in ways that support
their local community.
5. Adolescent’s sense of community on
MySpace and Facebook (Reich, 2010)
A Psychological Sense of Community
(McMillan & Chavis, 1986)
2. Membership
3. Influence
4. Integration and fulfilment of needs
5. Shared emotional connection
Networked Individualism
Allows people to remain connected, but as individuals
rather than being rooted in the home bases of work unit
and household, Individuals switch rapidly between social
networks rather than remain in a group or community.
Reich (2010)
6. Are online communities real?
Classic social science definitions of
community would suggest not.
Arguments against online community
Their members aren’t collocated
They don’t interact face to face
They can’t (and don’t) form the
necessary emotional bonds
7. Rheingold’s study of the WELL
community (1993)
Text –based bulletin-
board system (BBS)
known as the Whole
Earth Lectronic Link
Virtual ethnography -
showed the meaningful
emotional connections
that could develop via
online community
8. Multimodal Interactional
analysis of YouTube
Where is the community?
What makes it a community?
What part do multimodal interactions
play in making it feel like a community?
9. Things to look out for?
Reciprocity in communication
coordination of turn taking in conversation
Communication as ‘gift’ exchange
Ritualised behaviour
openings and closings
Defining the ‘meaning’ of the
communicative space
What behaviours are
allowed/expected/norms
How are these norms enforced
10. 2. Shared space/place
3. Shared practice
4. Shared resources and support
5. Shared identities
6. Interpersonal relationships
Baym (2010)
11. Shared Sense of Space
The Great Good Place
(Third Places)
Oldenburg’s three
essential places in
people's lives
the place they live,
i the place they work,
and
o the place they gather
for conviviality
12. Shared Sense of Space
Physical space remains
an important
metaphor even when
interactions are
happening online
13. Shared Practice
Routinised activities/behaviours that are shared by the
group
Updating status regularly (lifeblogging)
Responding to Facebook birthday reminders
Recording significant nights out/events
Reciprocal comments (i.e. using them as a conversational
medium)
The regularity of posts
14. Shared Practice – Common
Language
Netiquette in Text-based
environments
Paralanguage and
Twitter
@
RT
#
Reciprocity
in
comments/tweets
15. A Shared Practice – Common
Visual Language
Netiquette in multimodal
environments
Photos in Facebook
Gestures and body
language in YouTube
vlogging
Profile pictures and
backgrounds
Vlogging practices
Global dance/lip sync
16. Shared Resources and Support
Social capital
Bridging – exchanges typical of weak ties
Bonding – social and emotional support
Common Ground
Common interests or goals
Shared experiences and stories
17. Shared Identities
A group identity (e.g. YouTubers)
Processes of affiliation: friending, following,
subscribing
A set of consistent roles or personalities that exist
within the community: local experts; ‘answer people’;
entertainers; conversationalists; fans; ‘lurkers’ (viewers
of videos are not YouTubers); haters, flamers or trolls;
storytellers
19. Interpersonal relationships
Friendships and romances are also a significant part
of online communities
Processes of connection: liking, favouriting, direct
messaging (moving to other media), poking
Internet and in-person contact extend and enhance
each other (Wellman, 2004).
Video
20. Multimodal Activity
Examine different media responses to the YouTube
video provided and try to understand what makes this
an online ‘community’ activity.
Lucielovesyou – Hipster video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I-uV9EJWl8
One group for each of the following:
c Text comments
c Video content (dialogue and sound)
i Video content (body language)
o Video content (production elements)
Note times and content (e.g. quotes, events, etc.)
21. Media Modes
Sound Speech, music, laughter, background noise
Video Lighting Ambient lighting in
homes
Physical presence Posture, facial and bodily
gestures, eye contact,
pointing
Production elements On screen effects,
framing of shots, cutting
between scenes, etc.
Physical objects Placing objects in field of
view, gesturing with
objects,
Photos Similar to video but static
On screen text Video titles, tags, captions, comments, usernames,
messages
22. Multimodal Analysis Process
s Watch the videos
f Identify themes
◦ Observe and identify significant mulitmodal events
in communication – note the time
◦ Refer to existing literature on conversation to check
what you see and hear – for example Goffman
(1959)
3. Watch the videos
3 Describe the multimodal aspects of the videos
t Roughly transcribe the video data to clarify significant
moments in communication and identify
commonalities across videos
r Watch the videos
r Final transcription in a suitable form to explain
themes and subthemes
◦ Include standard annotation conventions
23. Feedback Session
What different stories do they tell?
What modes exist within each medium ?
How is this different from the exercise
yesterday?
What might we be missing here?
What do you think is important for online
community considering this evidence?
26. Multimodal transcription –
standardised annotation of speech:
(n) pause noted in seconds
= joining of words
: an extension of the preceding syllable;
; rising or falling intonation for subsequent
utterance
underlined text indicates spoken with particular
vocal energy
- a sudden cut off to an utterance;
? a rising tone
. a falling tone
, a shifting continuous tone bridging
utterances.
29. References
Reich, (2010) Adolescent’s sense of community on MySpace
and Facebook. Journal of Community Psychology 38(6) pp.
688-705
Rheingold, H. (1993) Virtual Community. Homesteading on the
Electronic Frontier. Available
online:http://www.rheingold.com/vc/book/intro.html
Turkle, S. (2011) Alone Together. Why we expect more from
technology and less from each other. New York: Basic
Books.
Wellman, B. and Gulia, M. (1997) “Virtual Communities as
Communities.” In Communities in Cyberspace: Perspectives
on New Forms of Social Organization, edited by Peter
Kollock and Marc Smith. Los Angeles: University of
California Press.
Notes de l'éditeur
Sampling issues – were they the ones choosing to go online?
Four elements of sense of community There are four elements of "sense of community" according to the McMillan & Chavis theory: Membership Membership includes five attributes: boundaries emotional safety a sense of belonging and identification personal investment a common symbol system Influence Influence works both ways: members need to feel that they have some influence in the group, and some influence by the group on its members is needed for group cohesion. Integration and fulfilment of needs Members feel rewarded in some way for their participation in the community. Shared emotional connection The "definitive element for true community" (1986, p. 14), it includes shared history and shared participation (or at least identification with the history).
Third Places Oldenburg identifies third places, or “great good places,” as the public places on neutral ground where people can gather and interact. In contrast to first places (home) and second places (work), third places allow people to put aside their concerns and simply enjoy the company and conversation around them. Third places “host the regular, voluntary, informal, and happily anticipated gatherings of individuals beyond the realms of home and work.” Oldenburg suggests that beer gardens, main streets, pubs, cafés, coffeehouses, post offices, and other third places are the heart of a community’s social vitality and the foundation of a functioning democracy. They promote social equality by leveling the status of guests, provide a setting for grassroots politics, create habits of public association, and offer psychological support to individuals and communities. Quotable “ In the absence of informal public life, living becomes more expensive. Where the means and facilities for relaxation and leisure are not publicly shared, they become the objects of private ownership and consumption.” “ What suburbia cries for are the means for people to gather easily, inexpensively, regularly, and pleasurably — a ‘place on the corner,’ real life alternatives to television, easy escapes from the cabin fever of marriage and family life that do not necessitate getting into an automobile.” “ Most needed are those ‘third places’ which lend a public balance to the increased privatization of home life. Third places are nothing more than informal public gathering places. The phrase ‘third places’ derives from considering our homes to be the ‘first’ places in our lives, and our work places the ‘second.’” “ The character of a third place is determined most of all by its regular clientele and is marked by a playful mood, which contrasts with people’s more serious involvement in other spheres. Though a radically different kind of setting for a home, the third place is remarkably similar to a good home in the psychological comfort and support that it extends…They are the heart of a community’s social vitality, the grassroots of democracy, but sadly, they constitute a diminishing aspect of the American social landscape.” “ Life without community has produced, for many, a life style consisting mainly of a home-to-work-and-back-again shuttle. Social well-being and psychological health depend upon community. It is no coincidence that the ‘helping professions’ became a major industry in the United States as suburban planning helped destroy local public life and the community support it once lent.” “ Totally unlike Main Street, the shopping mall is populated by strangers. As people circulate about in the constant, monotonous flow of mall pedestrian traffic, their eyes do not cast about for familiar faces, for the chance of seeing one is small. That is not part of what one expects there. The reason is simple. The mall is centrally located to serve the multitudes from a number of outlying developments within its region. There is little acquaintance between these developments and not much more within them. Most of them lack focal points or core settings and, as a result, people are not widely known to one another, even in their own neighborhoods, and their neighborhood is only a minority portion of the mall’s clientele.”