we have all had the experience - we send, or get, a flaming e-mail, FaceBook comment or post, youTube comment or thumbs down, etc. to/from someone but then when we meet them, contact them personally, skype w/them, etc., it is totally different, often friendly and open.
This phenomena plays out in all on-line forums. Folk are generally accurate and sometimes surprisingly, or even astonishingly, candid about their own personalities with "complete" strangers. This even extends to surveys where we give more honest answers to online surveys than we do for phone surveys.
This phenomena is not just found "on line", or that emerged with the internet, however. Recognizing this tendency, priests are separated from their confessing parishioner by a curtain or grill and the priest does not face the parishioner. Traditionally, psychiatrists had their patients lie on a couch rather than face them directly, although that is less common today. It even extends to when we are sitting next to someone, both facing in the same direction, whether it is in a car, a restaurant, or even in a meeting. we are much more likely to speak openly, freely and honestly about sensitive, emotional, or personal issues if we are sitting beside someone rather than if we are sitting across the table facing them, whether they are friend, foe, salesperson, or lover.
If one looks at this phenomena, labelled "online disinhibition", we find that it has been the subject of several studies; there is even a website dedicated to "stop anonymous online comments". John Suhler, a professor of psychology at Rider University, has done a lot of work on the subject, including a hypertext on-line book, "The Psychology of Cyberspace" and a blog of the same name.
John is also consulting editor for Behavior Online, a member of the editorial board for CyberPsychology and Behavior, a founder of the International Society for Mental Health Online (ISMHO), and editor of The Contemporary Media Forum for The Journal of Applied Psychoanalysis. He also co-created the ISMHO Clinical Case Study Group. His work has been reported often in national and international media.
This on-line disinhibition, arising from the impersonality of the medium, leads to deeply personal behavior of two types,
a) good or "benign disinhibition" in which folk may become more affectionate, more willing to open up to others, less guarded with their emotions, and may speak about what they are feeling in an apparent attempt to achieve an emotional catharsis.
b) bad or "toxic disinhibition" gives license for any imaginable bad behavior as users can frequently do or say as they wish without fear of any kind of meaningful reprisal. Recent attempts to legally punish extreme badgering, cyber bullying, or harassing which has gone as far as being implicated in suicides may be having some impact. Blocking, or banning users from certain media has little impact as, in most cases, reregistering under another name circumvents the ban. However, there have been many examples of folk losing their jobs over FaceBook postings, for example.
Suhler identifies 6 different factors for this unexpected behavior in on-line situations vs. "face-to-face", or personal contact situations.
a) You Don't Know Me - Dissociative anonymity - simple anonymity
b) You Can't See Me - Invisibility
c) See You Later - Asynchronicity - Conversations don't happen in real time, so there's no chance for direct responses.
d) It's All In My Head - Solipsistic introjection - Without any "real" visual cues, the mind assigns imaginary identities to the other person with associated traits based on one's own desires, needs and wishes. Few of these have anything to do with the real personality of the other person.
e) It's Just A Game - Dissociative imagination - Cyberspace is a game where normal rules of interaction don't apply. The online persona is dissociated from the offline reality. One can don or shed their online persona whenever they wish.
 |
| by Rigo Korosi |
This phenomena plays out in all on-line forums. Folk are generally accurate and sometimes surprisingly, or even astonishingly, candid about their own personalities with "complete" strangers. This even extends to surveys where we give more honest answers to online surveys than we do for phone surveys.
This phenomena is not just found "on line", or that emerged with the internet, however. Recognizing this tendency, priests are separated from their confessing parishioner by a curtain or grill and the priest does not face the parishioner. Traditionally, psychiatrists had their patients lie on a couch rather than face them directly, although that is less common today. It even extends to when we are sitting next to someone, both facing in the same direction, whether it is in a car, a restaurant, or even in a meeting. we are much more likely to speak openly, freely and honestly about sensitive, emotional, or personal issues if we are sitting beside someone rather than if we are sitting across the table facing them, whether they are friend, foe, salesperson, or lover.
If one looks at this phenomena, labelled "online disinhibition", we find that it has been the subject of several studies; there is even a website dedicated to "stop anonymous online comments". John Suhler, a professor of psychology at Rider University, has done a lot of work on the subject, including a hypertext on-line book, "The Psychology of Cyberspace" and a blog of the same name.
John is also consulting editor for Behavior Online, a member of the editorial board for CyberPsychology and Behavior, a founder of the International Society for Mental Health Online (ISMHO), and editor of The Contemporary Media Forum for The Journal of Applied Psychoanalysis. He also co-created the ISMHO Clinical Case Study Group. His work has been reported often in national and international media.
This on-line disinhibition, arising from the impersonality of the medium, leads to deeply personal behavior of two types,
a) good or "benign disinhibition" in which folk may become more affectionate, more willing to open up to others, less guarded with their emotions, and may speak about what they are feeling in an apparent attempt to achieve an emotional catharsis.
b) bad or "toxic disinhibition" gives license for any imaginable bad behavior as users can frequently do or say as they wish without fear of any kind of meaningful reprisal. Recent attempts to legally punish extreme badgering, cyber bullying, or harassing which has gone as far as being implicated in suicides may be having some impact. Blocking, or banning users from certain media has little impact as, in most cases, reregistering under another name circumvents the ban. However, there have been many examples of folk losing their jobs over FaceBook postings, for example.
Suhler identifies 6 different factors for this unexpected behavior in on-line situations vs. "face-to-face", or personal contact situations.
a) You Don't Know Me - Dissociative anonymity - simple anonymity
b) You Can't See Me - Invisibility
c) See You Later - Asynchronicity - Conversations don't happen in real time, so there's no chance for direct responses.
d) It's All In My Head - Solipsistic introjection - Without any "real" visual cues, the mind assigns imaginary identities to the other person with associated traits based on one's own desires, needs and wishes. Few of these have anything to do with the real personality of the other person.
e) It's Just A Game - Dissociative imagination - Cyberspace is a game where normal rules of interaction don't apply. The online persona is dissociated from the offline reality. One can don or shed their online persona whenever they wish.
f) We're Equals - Minimizing authority - There is no idea who the other person is; on-duty police investigator, registered criminal, government agent, "ordinary person", stalker, etc. Depending on the forum, online "status" is determined by ability to communicate, persistence, knowledge and technical ability. Traditional "superior-inferior" relationships do not apply so folk are more likely to say what they really feel.
How did this all evolve? Why do we behave like this?
Well, virtually all "higher" primates are highly socially-attuned "pack" animals. With that focus, all sorts of special cognitive brain capabilities developed to monitor carefully how they are being perceived, how they rank in the hierarchy, did they just do something "wrong" to someone "higher up" which might jeopardize their "standing", or that might even result in punishment or even being banished, etc.
Any face-to-face contact is potentially a "fight, flight, or mate" situation at the basic level adapted to our society. Staring at a higher ranking social superior is in effect a challenge not just in monkeys and apes, but in many human cultures as well. There are broad divergences in contemporary cultures in how acceptable it is to make eye contact. Even watch behaviors in an elevator to see how uncomfortable it is until someone makes a disarming comment; direct eye contact is virtually never OK.
Even our internal narratives preparing "what i'm going to tell him/her/them" for an upcoming meeting are subject to the same phenomena. Have you ever said exactly what you had prepared when you saw them face to face?
It is a fascinating dance we do; hopefully by understanding why it arises, and what it is, we will be better able to watch it arise and just let go of it.
How did this all evolve? Why do we behave like this?
Well, virtually all "higher" primates are highly socially-attuned "pack" animals. With that focus, all sorts of special cognitive brain capabilities developed to monitor carefully how they are being perceived, how they rank in the hierarchy, did they just do something "wrong" to someone "higher up" which might jeopardize their "standing", or that might even result in punishment or even being banished, etc.
Any face-to-face contact is potentially a "fight, flight, or mate" situation at the basic level adapted to our society. Staring at a higher ranking social superior is in effect a challenge not just in monkeys and apes, but in many human cultures as well. There are broad divergences in contemporary cultures in how acceptable it is to make eye contact. Even watch behaviors in an elevator to see how uncomfortable it is until someone makes a disarming comment; direct eye contact is virtually never OK.
Even our internal narratives preparing "what i'm going to tell him/her/them" for an upcoming meeting are subject to the same phenomena. Have you ever said exactly what you had prepared when you saw them face to face?
It is a fascinating dance we do; hopefully by understanding why it arises, and what it is, we will be better able to watch it arise and just let go of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment