Panacea or Panopticon?: The Hidden Power in Computer-Mediated Communication

Communication Research

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 1994, Pages 427-459

  Spears, Russell ^a   Lea, Martin ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84965419388     PISSN: 00936502     EISSN: 15523810     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/009365094021004001     Document Type: Article

References (103)

1. Balka, E. (1993). Women's access to on-line discussions about feminism. Electronic Journal of Communication, 3(1). [Machine-readable file available through comserve@vm.its.rpi.edu]
2. Barker, J., & Downing, H. (1985). Word processing and the transformation of patriarchal relations of control in the office. In D. MacKenzie & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The social shaping of technology (pp. 147-164). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
3. Baumeister, R. F. (1982). A self-presentational view of social phenomena. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 3-26.
4. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1981). Attention and self-regulation: A control theory approach to human behavior. New York: Springer-Verlag.
5. Cohen, G. A. (1984). Karl Marx's theory of history: A defence. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
6. Cook, K. S., Hegtvedt, K. A., & Yamagishi, T. (1988). Structural inequality, legitimation and reaction to inequity in exchange networks. In M. Webster & M. Foschi (Eds.), Status generalization: New theory and research (pp. 291-308). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
7. Cowan, R. S. (1985). The industrial revolution in the home. In D. MacKenzie & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The social shaping of technology (pp. 181-201). MIlton Keynes: Open University Press.
8. Culman, M. J., & Markus, M. L. (1987). Information technologies. In F. M. Jablin, L. L. Putnam, K. H. Roberts, & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication: An interdisciplinary perspective. London: Sage.
9. Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and organizational design. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 191-233.
10. Daft, R. L., Lengel, R. H., & Trevino, L. K. (1987). Message equivocality, media selection, and manager performance: Implications for manager performance. MIS Quarterly, 11, 355-366.
11. de Sola Pool, I. (1983). Technologies of freedom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12. Deutsch, M. & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational influences upon individual judgement. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629-636.
13. Diener, E. (1980). Deindividuation: The absence of self-awareness and self-regulation in group members. In P. Paulus (Ed.), The psychology of group influence. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
14. Dreyfus, H., & Rabinow, P. (1984). Michel Foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15. Drury, J. (1993). Ingroup visibility as a source of empowerment in collective action. Unpublished dissertation, University of Exeter/University of Amsterdam.
16. Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., & Sethna, B. (1991). The equalization phenomenon: Status effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision making groups. Human Computer Interaction, 6, 119-146.
17. Ellul, J. (1983). The technological system. New York: Continuum.
18. Emerson, R. M. (1990). Social exchange theory. In M. Rosenberg & R. H. Turner (Eds.), Social psychology: Sociological perspectives (pp. 30-65). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
19. Emmett, R. (1981, November). Vnet or gripenet? Datamation, pp. 48-58.
20. Fanning, T., & Raphael, B. (1986, December). Computer teleconferencing: Experience at Hewlett-Packard. Proceedings of the Conference on Computer-supported Cooperative work (CSCW 86), Austin, Texas.
21. Festinger, L., Pepitone, A., & Newcomb, T. (1952). Some consequences of deindividuation in a group. Journal of Applied Abnormal Psychology, 47, 382-389.
22. Finlay, M. (1987). Powermatics: A discursive critique of new technology. New York: Routledge.
23. Fiqueroa-Sarriera, H. J. (1993, April). Some body fantasies in cyberspace texts: A view from its exclusions. Paper presented at International Society for Theoretical Psychology Conference, Saclas, France.
24. Forty, A. (1986). Objects of desire: Design and society since 1750. London: Thames and Hudson.
25. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
26. Foucault, M. (1980). Power / knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977 (C. Gordon, Ed. and Trans.). Brighton: Harvester.
27. French, J.R.P., & Raven, B. H. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 118-149). Michigan: Institute for Social Research.
28. Frick, F. C. (1959). Information theory. In S. Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A study of science. London: McGraw-Hill.
29. Gandy, O. (1993). The panoptic sort: A political economy of personal information. Boulder, CO: Westview.
30. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Chicago, IL: Polity.
31. Gordijn, E., & Reicher, S. D. (1993). Deindividuation and the expression of social identity: The effects of visibility to the ingroup, while being identifiable by a powerful out-group. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Psychology, University of Exeter.
32. Haraway, D. J. (1992). A cyborg manifesto: Science, technology and socialist-feminism in the late twentieth century. In D. J. Haraway (Ed.), Simians, cyborgs and women. London: Free Association Press.
33. Hernrig, S. C. (1993). Gender and democracy in computer-mediated communication. Electronic Journal of Communication, 3(2), [Machine-readable file available through comserve@vm.its.rpi.edu]
34. Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (1978/1992). The network nation: Human communication via computer. Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley.
35. Hiltz, S. R., Turoff, M., & Johnson, K. (1989). Experiments in group decision making, 3: Disinhibition, deindividuation, and group process in pen name and real name computer conferences. Decision Support Systems, 5, 217-232.
36. Hogg, M. A. (1987). Social identity and group cohesiveness. In J. C. Turner, M. A. Hogg, P. J. Oakes, S. D. Reicher, & M. S. Wetherell (Eds.), Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
37. Hogg, M. A. (1992). The social psychology of group cohesiveness: From attraction to social identity. London: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
38. Hollingshead, A. B., & McGrath, J. E. (1993). The whole is less than the sum of its parts: A critical review of research on computer-assisted groups. In R. A. Guzzo & E. Salas (Eds.), Team decisions and team performance in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
39. Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign policy decisions and fiascoes. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
40. Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.
41. Kaplan, S. (1990). Communication technology and society. In G. Phillips & J. Wood (Eds.), Speech communication: Essays to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the Speech Communications Association (pp. 205-234). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
42. Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 1123-1134.
43. Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L. (1992). Group decision making and communication technology. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52, 96-123.
44. Kiesler, S., Zubrow, D., Moses, A. M., & Geller, V. (1985). Affect in computer-mediated communication: An experiment in synchronous terminal-to-terminal discussion. Human-Computer Interaction, 1, 77-104.
45. Latané, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact. American Psychologist, 36, 343-356.
46. Latané, B., & Nida, S. (1980). Social impact theory and group influence: A social engineering perspective. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
47. Lea, M., & Giordano, R. (in press). Representations of the group in CSCW research: A case of premature closure? In G. Bowker, L. Gasser, S. L. Star, & W. Turner (Eds.), Social science research, technical systems and cooperative work. Cambridge: MIT Press.
48. Lea, M., O'Shea, T., Fung, P., & Spears, R. (1992). “Flaming” in computer-mediated communication: Observations, explanations and implications. In M. Lea (Ed.), Contexts of computer-mediated communication. London: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
49. Lea, M., & Spears, R. (1991). Computer-mediated communication, deindividuation and group decision-making. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, Special Issue on CSCW and Groupware, 39, 283-301.
50. Lea, M., & Spears, R. (1992). Paralanguage and social perception in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Organizational Computing, 2, 321-342.
51. Lea, M., & Spears, R. (in press). Are friends electric? Building personal relationships over computer networks. In J. T. Woods & S. Duck (Eds.), Understudied relationships: Off the beaten track. London: Sage.
52. Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 34-47.
53. Marvin, C. (1988). When old technologies were new: Thinking about electric communication in the late nineteenth century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
54. Matheson, K. (1992). Women and computer technology: Communicating for herself. In M. Lea (Ed.), Contexts of computer-mediated communication. London: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
55. Matheson, K., & Zanna, M. P. (1989). Persuasion as a function of self-awareness in computer-mediated communication. Social Behavior, 4, 99-111.
56. McGuire, T. W., Kiesler, S., & Siegel, J. (1987). Group and computer-mediated discussion effects in risk decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 917-930.
57. Morley, I. E., & Stephenson, G. M. (1969). Interpersonal and interparty exchange: A laboratory simulation of an industrial negotiation at the plant level. British Journal of Psychology, 60, 543-545.
58. Morley, I. E., & Stephenson, G. M. (1970). Formality in experimental negotiations: A validation study. British Journal of Psychology, 61, 383.
59. Myers, D. (1987). “Anonymity is part of the magic”: Individual manipulation of computer-mediated communication contexts. Qualitative Sociology, 10(3), 251-266.
60. Naisbitt, J. (1982). Megatrends: Ten new directions for transforming our lives. New York: Warner.
61. Newman, W. M., Eldridge, M. A., & Lamming, M. G. (1991, September). PEPYS: Generating autobiographies by automatic tracking. In L. Bannon, M. Robinson, & K. Schmidt (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW 91). Amsterdam, the Netherlands, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
62. Ng, S. H. (1980). The social psychology of power. London: Academic Press.
63. Perry, T. S. (1992a, October). Forces for social change. Special report/electronic mail. IEEE Spectrum, pp. 30-32.
64. Perry, T. S. (1992b, October). E-mail at work. Electronic mail. IEEE Spectrum, pp. 24-28.
65. Porter, P. (1984). “Dear PP05”: Interpersonal communication and the computer: Entering a brave new world. Library Hi Tech, 2, 23-27.
66. Poster, M. (1990). The mode of information: Poststructuralism and social context. Chicago: Polity.
67. Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (1993, September). A meta-analysis of deindividuation research: How ‘anti’ is antinormative behavior. Paper presented at the 10th general meeting of the European Association for Experimental Social Psychology, Lisbon, Portugal.
68. Prentice-Dunn, S., & Rogers, R. W. (1989). Deindividuation and the self-regulation of behavior. In P. Paulus (Ed.), The psychology of group influence (pp. 87-109). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
69. Reicher, S. D. (1984). Social influence in the crowd: Attitudinal and behavioral effects of deindividuation in conditions of high and low group salience. British Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 341-350.
70. Reicher, S. D. (1987). Crowd behavior as social action. In J. C. Turner, M. A. Hogg, P. J. Oakes, S. D. Reicher, & M. S. Wetherell (Eds.), Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
71. Reicher, S. D., & Levine, M. (in press-a). 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, 145-163.
72. Reicher, S. D., & Levine, M. (in press). On the strategic consequences of deindividuation manipulations: Identifiability and the self-presentation of social identity. European Journal of Social Psychology.
73. Reicher, S. D., Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (in press). Deindividuation and intergroup relations. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), The European review of social psychology, 6, (Eds.), London: Wiley.
74. Rice, R. E. (1984). Mediated group communication. In Rice, R. E., Bair, H. J., Chen, M., Dimmick, J., Dozier, D. M., Jacob, M. E., Johnson, B. M., Penniman, W. D., Svenning, L. L., Rogers, E. M., Rothenbuhler, E. W., Ruchinskas, J. E., & Williams, F. (Eds.), The new media: Communication, research and technology (pp. 129-154). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
75. Rice, R. E. (1987). Computer-mediated communication and organizational innovation. Journal of Communication, 37(4), 65-94.
76. Rice, R. E., & Love, G. (1987). Electronic emotion: Socio-emotional content in a computer-mediated communication network. Communication Research, 14, 85-108.
77. Rosenberg, M. S. (1992). Virtual reality: Reflections of life, dreams and technology: An ethnography of a computer society. Electronic Journal on Virtual Culture, 1. [Machine readable file available through list-serv@kentvm.kent.edu]
78. Roszak, T. (1986). The cult of information. New York: Pantheon.
79. Rutter, D. R. (1987). Communicating by telephone. Oxford: Pergamon.
80. Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. Chichester: Wiley.
81. Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., & McGuire, T. (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 157-187.
82. Smith, J., & Balka, E. (1988). Chatting on a feminist computer network. In C. Kramarae (Ed.), Technology and women's voices: Keeping in touch (pp. 82-97). New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
83. Spears, R. (1994). Isolating the collective self: The social context and content of identity, rationality and behavior. NWO Pionier research grant application, University of Amsterdam.
84. Spears, R. (in press). Why depopulation should not (necessarily) be taken personally, commentary on “Repopulating the depopulated pages of social psychology,” by M. Billig. Theory and Psychology.
85. 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. London: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
86. Spears, R., Lea, M., & Lee, S. (1990). De-individuation and group polarization in computer-mediated communication. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 121-134.
87. Spears, R., & Oyen, M. (1992, July). How minimal is the minimal group? Poster presented at EAESP/SESP joint meeting, Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
88. Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492-1512.
89. Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections: New ways of working in the networked organization. Cambridge: MIT Press.
90. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
91. Toffler, A. (1980). The third wave. London: Pan.
92. Trevino, L. K., Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1990). Understanding managers media choices: A symbolic interactionist perspective. In J. Fulk & C. Steinfield (Eds.), Organizations and communication technology (pp. 71-94). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
93. Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
94. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
95. Van Dijk, J.A.G.M. (1993). Communications networks and modernization. Communication Research, 20, 384-407.
96. Van Gelder, L. V. (1985). The strange case of the electronic lover. Ms. Magazine, October, 1985. Reprinted in C. Dunlop & R. Kling (1991), Computerization and controversy: Value conflicts and social choices. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
97. Walther, J. B., Anderson, J. F., & Park, D. W. (1993). Computer-mediated interaction and interpersonal effects: A meta-analysis of past research. Unpublished manuscript, Northwestern University.
98. Weisband, S. P. (1992). Group discussion and first advocacy effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision making groups. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 53, 352-380.
99. Weisband, S. P., Schneider, S. K., & Connolly, T. (1992, June). Participation equality and influence: Status effects in computer-mediated decision making groups. Paper presented at the fourth annual meeting of the American Psychological Society, San Diego, CA.
100. Wilder, D. A. (1978). Reduction of intergroup discrimination through individuation of the out-group. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1361-1374.
101. Zimbardo, P. G. (1969). The human choice: Individuation reason and order versus deindividuation impulse and chaos. In W. J. Arnold & D. Levine (Eds.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation: Volume 17 (pp. 237-307). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
102. Zmud, R. (1990). Opportunities for strategic information manipulation through new information technology. In J. Fulk & C. Steinfield (Eds.), Organizations and communication technology (pp. 95-116). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
103. Zuboff, S. (1988). In the age of the smart machine: The future of work and power. New York: Basic Books.