Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Cyberpsychology and the digital divide - Coggle Diagram
Cyberpsychology and the digital divide
Cyberpsychology
Phubbing
Roberts and David (2016)
Expectancy violations theory (Burgoon, 1993)
There are violations of non-verbal expectations in regards to our interactions.
Depending on if they are the person or the observer, that changes their perception of phubbing (Amichai-Hamburger and Etgar, 2016)
Actor observer bias (Jones and Nesbit, 1972)
People differ in online self presentation
Goffman (1959) stage and audience metaphor
We want to control what others think of us and the extent of this varies between people
2 factor model (Leary and Kowalski, 1990)
Consider impression motivation and impression construction
Motivation here has three factors (Goal relevance, desirability of outcome and discrepancy between self images)
There are five factors for construction (Self-concept, desired and undesired identity image, role constraints, values of the target and current or potential social image)
Impression motivation can be high but impression construction might not be.
Sociometer theory (Leary et al, 1995)
LSE are careful of the sociometer droping further
Hyperpersonal model of CMC (Walther, 1996)
Interactions online can become better than their offline counterparts as they can become hyperpersonal.
Due to the channel as it can make communication less challenging
Time is another factor as asynchronous interaction is more accepted.
The sender can do optimal self-presentation.
Feedback loop between sender and receiver
Lined to the 7 points outlined by Amichai-Hamburger et al, 2017
These list some of the big differences between the online and offline world
Anonymous feeling, 2.Control over physical exposure levels, 3. High control over communications, 4. ease in finding like minded people, 5. accessible and available all times and place, 6. Feeling of equality, 7. Fun of web surfing
Manago et al, 2008 found that myspace users made use of identity exploration and idealised selves
Idealised VR hypothesis (Back et al, 2010)
Extended real life hypothesis on FB
Zhao et al, 2010 anchored reality
Leads to the idea that online interactions could help people socialise better (Social compensation hypothesis) or enhance pre-existing levels of sociality (Social enhancement)
Forest and Wood (2012) found that people with LSE preferred FB interactions over ftf.
They rate them as less positive and more negative when others rate their content
1 more item...
Getting richer could also be thought of with perosnality types
Extraverts are more likely to use FB than introverts
3 more items...
Different types of social captial
Bridging- These ties are weaker but they are good for emotional support
Bonding- Emotionally close and tight knit
Maintenance- People we used to know ftf but now we just have an online relationship with them.
FBI predicts this. Johnston et al, 2013
FB use- bonding and FB intensity especially LSE
Ellison et al, 2007
Went back to the same students and found the same thing in 2008 (Steinfield et al, 2008)
Digital divide
Many conceptualisations but use the internet Versus does not is the most basic
Also important to factor in access, skills and competencies
Intellectual disabilities, access and skill (Chadwick et al, 2019)
Van Dijk et al, 2017 proposed three different levels
Internet access (Has or has not), 2. Has skills or not, 3. able to gain beneficial outcomes or not.
It's also been considered in terms of age.
Technology acceptance model (Davis, 1989)
There are three main factors that influence if a technology is accepted
External factors (techno features), cognitive responses (thoughts) and affective responses
Idea of digital natives and digital migrants presented by Prensky, 2001
Migrants before 1980 and natives after 1980