Breaching or building social boundaries? SIDE-effects of computer-mediated communication

Communication Research

Volumn 25, Issue 6, 1998, Pages 689-715

  Postmes, Tom ^a   Spears, Russell ^a   Lea, Martin ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032221839     PISSN: 00936502     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/009365098025006006     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Balka, E. (1993). Women and media in Canada: A feminist sampler. Electronic Journal of Communication/La Revue Electronique de Communication [On-line], 3. Available at http://www.cios.org/www.ejc/ v3n193.htm.
2. Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). The automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait concept and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 230-244.
3. Brouwer, J., Kawakami, J., Rojahn, K., & Postmes, T. (1997). De effecten van de (on)zichtbaarheid van sekse op zelf-stereotypering [The effects of gender (in)visibility on self-stereotyping]. In C.K.W. De Dreu, N. K. de Vries, D. Van Knippenberg, & C. Rutte (Eds.), Fundamentale sociale psychologie (Vol. 11, pp. 150-157). Tilburg, the Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
4. Colman, A. M. (1991). Crowd psychology in South African murder trials. American Psychologist, 46, 1071-1079.
5. Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 629-636.
6. Diener, E. (1980). Deindividuation: The absence of self-awareness and self-regulation in group members. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), The psychology of group influence (pp. 209-242). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7. Dijksterhuis, A., Spears, R., Postmes, T., Stapel, D. A., Koomen, W., van Knippenberg, A., & Scheepers, D. (in press). Seeing one thing and doing another: Contrast effects in automatic behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
8. Dubrovsky, V. J., Kiesler, S., & Sethna, B. N. (1991). The equalization phenomenon: Status effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision-making groups. Human Computer Interaction, 6, 119-146.
9. Festinger, L., Pepitone, A., & Newcomb, T. (1952). Some consequences of deindividuation in a group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 382-389.
10. Franzoi, S. L. (1996). Social psychology. Madison, WI: Brown & Benchmark.
11. Fulk, J., & DeSanctis, G. (1995). Electronic communication and changing organizational forms. Organization Science, 6, 337-349.
12. Haraway, D. (1990). A manifesto for cyborgs: Science, technology, and socialist feminism in the 1980s. In L. J. Nicholson (Ed.), Feminism/Postmodernism (pp. 190-233). London: Routledge.
13. Hayne, S., & Rice, R. (1997). Social cues and anonymous group interaction using group support systems. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 47, 429-450.
14. Herring, S. C. (1993). Gender and democracy in computer-mediated communication. Electronic Journal of Communication/Revuew Electronique de Communication. [On-line], 3. Available: http://www.cios.org/ www/ejc/v3n293.htm.
15. Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (1978). The network nation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16. Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (1993). Preface to the revised edition. In S. R. Hiltz & M. Turoff (Eds.), The network nation (pp. xxix-xxxi). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17. Hiltz, S. R., Turoff, M., & Johnson, K. (1989). Experiments in group decision making, 3: Disinhibition, deindividuation, and group processes in pen name and real name computer conferences. Decision Support Systems, 5, 217-232.
18. Hodges, A. (1983). Alan Turing: The enigma. London: Vintage.
19. Hogg, M. A. (1992). The social psychology of group cohesiveness: From attraction to social identity. Hemel Hempstead, England: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
20. Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascoes (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
21. Jessup, L. M., Connolly, T., & Tansik, D. A. (1990). Toward a theory of automated group work: The deindividuating effects of anonymity. Small Group Research, 21, 333-348.
22. Johnson, R. D., & Downing, L. L. (1979). Deindividuation and valence of cues: Effects on prosocial and antisocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1532-1538.
23. Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 1123-1134.
24. Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L. (1992). Group decision making and communication technology [Special issue: Group decision making]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52, 96-123.
25. Lea, M., & Giordano, R. (1997). Representations of the group and group processes in CSCW research: A case of premature closure? In G. Bowker, S. L. Star, W. Turner, & L. Gasser (Eds.), Social science, technical systems and cooperative work (pp. 5-25). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
26. Lea, M., O'Shea, T., Fung, P., & Spears, R. (1992). "Flaming" in computer-mediated communication: observations, explanations, implications. In M. Lea (Ed.), Contexts of computer-mediated communication (pp. 30-65). Hemel Hempstead, England: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
27. Lea, M., & Spears, R. (1991). Computer-mediated communication, deindividuation and group decision-making [Special issue: Computer-supported cooperative work and groupware]. International Journal of Man Machine Studies, 34, 283-301.
28. Lea, M., & Spears, R. (1992). Paralanguage and social perception in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Organizational Computing, 2, 321-342.
29. Lea, M., & Spears, R. (1995). Love at first byte? Building personal relationships over computer networks. In J. T. Wood & S. Duck (Eds.), Understudied relationships: Off the beaten track (pp. 197-233). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30. Lea, M., Spears, R., & de Groot, D. (1998). Knowing me, knowing you: Effects of visual anonymity on stereotyping and attraction in computer-mediated groups. Manuscript in preparation.
31. Le Bon, G. (1995). The crowd: A study of the popular mind. London: Transaction Publishers. (Original work published 1895)
32. Lord, C. G. (1997). Social psychology. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.
33. Mantovani, G. (1994). Is computer-mediated communication intrinsically apt to enhance democracy in organizations? Human Relations, 47, 45-62.
34. Matheson, K., & Zanna, M. P. (1988). The impact of computer-mediated communication on self-awareness. Computers in Human Behavior, 4, 221-233.
35. Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (1982). Socialization in small groups: Temporal changes in individual-group relations. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 15, pp. 137-192). New York: Academic Press.
36. Myers, D. (1987). "Anonymity is part of the magic": Individual manipulation of computer-mediated communication contexts. Qualitative Sociology, 10, 251-266.
37. Nunamaker, J. F., Dennis, A. R., Valacich, J. S., & Vogel, D. R. (1991). Information technology for negotiating groups: Generating options for mutual gain. Management Science, 37, 1325-1346.
38. Poster, M. (1990). The mode of informotion: Poststructuralism and social context. Chicago: Polity.
39. Postmes, T. (1997). Social influence in computer-mediated groups. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Amsterdam.
40. Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (1997, March). Quality of decisions, group norms and social identity: Biased sampling or sampled biases. Paper presented at the Fifth Munster Workshop on the Social Identity Approach, Rothenberge, Germany.
41. Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (1998). Deindividuation and anti-normative behavior: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 238-259.
42. Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (in press). Social identity, group norms, and "deindividuation": Lessons from computer-mediated communication for social influence in the group. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
43. Postmes, T., Spears, R., Sakhel, K., & de Groot, D. (1998). Social influence in computer-mediated groups: The effects of anonymity on group behavior. Manuscript submitted for publication.
44. Reicher, S. (1982). The determination of collective behaviour. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social identity and intergroup relations (pp. 41-83). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
45. Reicher, S. (1987). Crowd behaviour as social action. In J. C. Turner (Ed.), Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory (pp. 171-202). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
46. Reicher, S. (1996). "The crowd" century: Reconciling practical success with theoretical failure. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 535-553.
47. Reicher, S., & Levine, M. (1994). Deindividuation, power relations between groups and the expression of social identity: The effects of visibility to the out-group. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 145-164.
48. Reicher, S., Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (1995). A social identity model of deindividuation phenomena. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European Review of Social Psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 161-198). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
49. Rice, R. E., & Love, G. (1987). Electronic emotion: Socioemotional content in a computer-mediated communication network. Communication Research, 14, 85-108.
50. Rojahn, K. (1996). Gender in the context of leadership. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Amsterdam.
51. Sabini, J. (1995). Social psychology (2nd ed.). New York: Norton.
52. Short, J. A., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
53. Spears, R. (1995). Isolating the collective self. In A. Oosterwegel & R. A. Wicklund (Eds.), The self in European and North American culture: Developments and processes (pp. 309-322). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
54. Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1992). Social influence and the influence of the "social" in computer-mediated communication. In M. Lea (Ed.), Contexts of computer-mediated communication (pp. 30-65). Hemel Hempstead, England: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
55. Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1994). Panacea or panopticon? The hidden power in computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 21, 427-459.
56. Spears, R., Lea, M., & Lee, S. (1990). De-individuation and group polarization in computer-mediated communication. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 121-134.
57. Srull, T. K., & Wyer, R. S., Jr. (1979). The role of category accessibility in the interpretation of information about persons: Some determinants and implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1660-1672.
58. Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1467-1478.
59. Straus, S. G. (1996). Getting a clue: The effects of communication media and information distribution on participation and performance in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups. Small Group Research, 27, 115-142.
60. Tajfel, H. (1978). Interindividual behaviour and intergroup behaviour. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 27-60). London: Academic Press.
61. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), The psychology of intergroup relations (2nd ed., pp. 7-24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
62. Tarde, G. (1921). Les lois de l'imitation [The laws of imitation]. Paris: Librairie Felix Alcan. (Original work published 1890)
63. Turing, A. M. (1936). On computable numbers, with an application to the Entscheidungsproblem. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 2, 230-265.
64. Turkle, S. (1996). Parallel lives: Working on identity in virtual space. In D. Grodin & T. R. Lindlof (Eds.), Constructing the self in a mediated world (pp. 156-175). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
65. Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a cognitive redefinition of the group. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social identity and intergroup relations (pp. 15-40). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
66. Turner, J. C. (1985). Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 2, pp. 77-122). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
67. Turner, J. C. (1987). A self-categorization theory. In J. C. Turner, M. A. Hogg, P. J. Oakes, S. D. Reicher, & M. S. Wetherell (Eds.), Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorisation theory (pp. 42-67). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
68. Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press.
69. Valacich, J. S., Jessup, L. M., Dennis, A. R., & Nunamaker, J. F. (1992). A conceptual framework of anonymity in group support systems. Group Decision and Negotiation, 1, 219-241.
70. Waldzus, S., Schubert, T., & Frindte, W. (1997). Ingroup-favouritism and ingroup-salience under computer mediated conditions: An extended replication of minimal group results. Manuscript submitted for publication.
71. Walther, J. B. (1995). Relational aspects of computer-mediated communication: Experimental observations over time. Organization Science, 6, 186-203.
72. Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 1-43.
73. Walther, J., Anderson, J. F., & Park, D. W. (1994). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A meta-analysis of social and anti-social communication. Communication Research, 21, 460-487.
74. Zimbardo, P. G. (1969). The human choice: Individuation, reason, and order vs. deindividuation, impulse and chaos. In W. J. Arnold & D. Levine (Eds.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Vol. 17, pp. 237-307). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.