Abstract
I
Presenting a completely false or skewed online persona may not necessarily be the norm, with many considering this type of behavior morally inexcusable. Even so, the online world may be likened to a type of “social laboratory” where individuals can experiment with the presentation of multiple identities. 2 Indeed, there are numerous features of cyberspace that permit all users a greater degree of flexibility in how they present themselves to others. From accentuating one's more positive characteristics on an online dating Web site to selectively uploading photos to social media feeds to give the impression that our lives are more fun and interesting than they may actually be, the Internet provides us all with opportunities to present an idealized self-image and to try out different self-presentations with different audiences.
Pausing for one moment to contemplate online behavior, everything that people do online involves a self-representation of some sort. Whether that self is a grounded factual demographic representation (e.g., online banking) or a completely fabricated false self (e.g., catfishing), people put themselves online. With this underlying notion in mind, it has long been established by researchers working in this field that the increased flexibility in online self-presentation is made possible by many of the idiosyncratic features of new and emerging technology. In his highly influential work around computer-mediated communication, for example, Walther and Parks 3 noted that users can exploit many of the unique elements of the online world in order to present a more optimal version of the self, which may in turn facilitate relationship formation and maintenance.
A particular feature of online communication that aids this self-creation and presentation is the asynchronicity of many forms of online communication. As exchanges via modes of communication such as e-mail and instant messaging do not necessarily take place in real time, users can create, edit, and reflect upon their messages with greater consideration and precision before sending them on. In doing so, they are manipulating their online self-representations and either implicitly or explicitly attempting to control how others perceive them online.4,5
Since Walther and Parks' 3 and Turkle's 2 early observations on the nature of computer-mediated communication and online self-presentation, research has set out to establish the different ways in which we manage the impressions of others across diverse online spaces as the Internet continues to evolve. Additionally, there has been a special focus in the academic literature around which factors might contribute to an individual's inclination to experiment with their self-presentation online. For example, in a recent paper published in this journal, Fullwood et al. 4 note how clarity of self-concept (i.e., the extent to which our self-beliefs are internally consistent, stable, and confidently defined) was an important predictor of adolescents' proclivity to present idealized images of the self and multiple self-presentations across different online platforms. They argue that as adolescence is a crucial stage in human development, the Internet may be used as means of self-discovery to find a version of the self that they are happy with.
In addition, the reactions one receives from others around online self-presentations may help develop and shape a self that could be incorporated into one's wider “offline” self-concept. This highlights an important point about the different ways in which the self is presented online, in that it may also influence one's attitudes toward the self in a more general sense. Indeed, Yee and Bailenson's 6 research on the “Proteus effect” is a particularly good example to illustrate this point, demonstrating that individuals adopt the behavioral characteristics they associate with their avatars in both online and offline spaces. Given the fluidity with which people thus move the self between online and offline arenas, it is suggested that the two should no longer be conceptualized as two completely distinct entities, but rather should be seen as intertwined spaces where our behaviors in one sphere transfer and influence how we behave and perceive ourselves in the other and vice versa. These are the considerations that prompted the content for this special issue.
We are proud to be able to present this special issue on “constructing the self online” and would like to thank Professor Brenda Wiederhold and Mary Ann Liebert for giving us the opportunity to gather this impressive body of research. We are also very grateful to all of the authors for their valuable contributions, and we hope that readers will find the special issue thought-provoking and informative. With a focus on constructing the self online, the published articles represent the diversity of research around the different ways in which people create, edit, and evaluate their online identities. Some of the research presented in this special issue investigates how individual differences (e.g., in personality) might predict different types of online self-presentation behavior. For example, White, Cutello, Gummerum, and Hanoch consider how differences in self-monitoring and impulsiveness are predictive of risky self-presentation on social media, for instance making reference to drugs and alcohol. White, Wright, and Obst investigated factors that predict false online self-presentation, finding that moral norms were predictive of “lying behaviors” (e.g., making untruthful status updates), whereas age, self-esteem, group norms, and moral norms were predictive of “liking behaviors” (e.g., liking posts dishonestly). Lee and Cho considered the role of social support on Facebook, noting that individuals who have a greater fear of social isolation are more likely to attempt to garner approval from others by regulating their self-presentation and are less likely to express their true thoughts and feelings. The findings from these studies provide further insights into the diverse ways in which individuals manage impressions online, as well as the factors that might help us to understand these different types of self-presentation behaviors.
Other studies in the special issue look at the ways in which online self-presentation interacts with one's offline behaviors and attitudes. For example, Pegg, O'Donnell, Lala, and Barber note how exposure to risky content in the form of posts about alcohol was associated with higher levels of alcohol use. Moreover, this association was stronger for participants whose online social identity was more important to them, perhaps indicating that aligning behaviors with those of other members of our online social groups is a way to “demonstrate, enact and maintain social identity.” van Oosten de Vries, Dian, and Peter noted that adolescents who engaged in more frequent sexy self-presentations via social media were more likely to consider being sexually outgoing an important part of their self-concept 6 months later, suggesting that our online behavior plays an important role in determining how we see ourselves.
Papers are also included that have focused specifically on the presentation of the self in more specific online arenas such as online dating. Fullwood and Attrill note how participants consider themselves to have a higher potential of success in attracting partners when presenting themselves online as opposed to offline when engaging in dating behavior. In line with Walther's ideas around “hyperpersonal” communication, their findings suggest that users perceive that they are able to exploit some of the idiosyncratic features of online dating sites to their advantage. Lemke and Merz investigated body presentation in gay online dating sites. Their findings indicate that approximately two-thirds of daters indicated uploading nude pictures of themselves. Moreover, three motivations were driving factors in predicting the uploading of nude photos: attracting attention, self-verification, and empowerment. The authors acknowledge that although previous research has tended to focus on negative aspects of body presentation (e.g., self-objectification), their findings suggest that nude body presentation may also be an empowering experience.
Finally, Chadwick and Fullwood also focus on the empowering potential of social media in their qualitative investigation of the online identities of individuals with intellectual disabilities. Their research highlights the potential for social media for the positive development and maintenance of important social bonds for individuals with intellectual disabilities, as well as being a space in which autonomy and self-worth are enabled. Further, participants expressed that they enjoyed sharing various online identities, and these did not focus on nor hide their impairments. Although media coverage of social media has a habit of focusing on its damaging effects, studies such as this one provide a more balanced and nuanced understanding of the positive aspects of social media use, particularly for individuals who potentially have so much more to gain, developmentally and socially, from their time online.
We hope that you enjoy reading this special issue as much as we enjoyed compiling it.