Generally, online support groups are viewed as low-threshold services. We challenge this assumption with an investigation, based on Conversation Analysis and Membership Categorization Analysis, of contributions to an online support group on eating disorders. In this analysis we show how a new member interacts with existing members in order to display legitimacy for membership of the group. The group operates as a Community of Practice, since membership is organized as joined participation in a writing practice. It becomes clear that becoming a member involves subscribing to normative requirements, centrally, displaying the insight that you are ill. In the case we focus on, this involves the requirement to leave pro-anorexia as a membership category behind. The novice does not yet seem ready to subscribe to this norm and thus the threshold for seeking support is heightened.
Antaki, C., Ardévol, E., Núnez, F. and Vayreda, A. ( 2005) ‘ "For She Who Knows Who She Is": Managing Accountability in Online Forum Messages’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication11(1): art. 6.
2.
Döring, N. ( 1997) ‘Selbsthilfe, Beratung und Therapie im Internet’ , in B. Batinic (ed.) Internet für Psychologen, pp. 421-53. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
3.
Döring, N. ( 2001) ‘Sozialpsychologische Chat-Forschung; Methoden, Theorien, Befunde’, in M. Beisswenger (ed.) Chat-kommunikation; Sprache, Interaktion, Sozialität und Identität in synchroner computervermittelter Kommunikation. Perspektieven auf ein interdisziplinaires Forschungsfeld, pp. 141-86. Stuttgart: ibidem Verlag.
4.
Eckert, P. and McConnell-Ginet, S. ( 1992) ‘Think Practically and Look Locally: Language and Gender as Community-based Practice’, Annual Review Anthropology21: 461-90.
5.
Ess, C. and Association of Internet Research (2002) ‘Ethical Decision-making and Internet Research; Recommendations from the AOIR Ethics Working Committee’, available online at: [www.aoir.org/reports/ethics.pdf], accessed 21 October 2005.
6.
Finn, J. ( 1999) ‘An Exploration of Helping Processes in an Online Self-help Group Focussing on Issues of Disabilities’, Health and Social Work24: 220-31.
7.
Galegher, J., Sproull, L. and Kiesler, S. ( 1998) ‘Legitimacy, Authority and Community in Electronic Support Groups’, Written Communication15(4): 493-530.
8.
Garfinkel, H. ( 1967) Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
9.
Goffman, E. ( 1974) Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience . New York: Harper.
10.
Goffman, E. ( 1981) Forms of Talk. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
11.
Hoffman, E. ( 1974) Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience . New York: Harper.
12.
Hoffman, E. ( 1981) Forms of Talk. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
13.
Herring, S. ( 2004) ‘Computer-mediated Discourse Analysis: An Approach to Researching Online Behavior’, in S. Barab, R. Kling and J. Gray (eds) Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning, pp. 338-76. New York: Cambridge University Press.
14.
Hester, S. ( 1998) ‘Describing ‘‘Deviance’’ in School: Recognizably Educational Psychological Problems’, in C. Antaki and S. Widdicombe (eds) Identities in Talk, pp. 133-50. London : Sage.
15.
Hutchby, I. and Wooffitt, R. ( 1998) Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications . Cambridge: Polity Press.
16.
Jefferson, G. and Lee, J.R.E. ( 1981) ‘The Rejection of Advice: Managing the Problematic Convergence of a "Troubles Telling" and a "Service Encounter"’, Journal of Pragmatics5: 399-422.
17.
King, S. ( 1994) ‘Analysis of Electronic Support Groups for Addicts’ , Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century2(3): 47-56.
18.
King, S. ( 1996) ‘Researching Internet Communities: Proposed Ethical Guidelines for the Reporting of the Results’, The Information Society12(2): 119-27.
19.
Koole, T. and Hanson, M. ( 2002) ‘The Category ‘‘Moroccan’’ in a Multi-ethnic Class’, in S. Hester and W. Housley (eds) Language, Interaction and National Identity. Studies in the Social Organization of National Identity in Talk-in-Interaction, pp. 211-32. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
20.
Lamerichs, J. and te Molder, H. ( 2003) ‘Computer-mediated Communication: From a Cognitive to a Discursive Model’, New Media and Society5(4): 451-73.
21.
Lasker, J., Sogolow, E. and Sharim, R. ( 2005) ‘The Role of an Online Community for People with a Rare Disease: Content Analysis of Messages Posted on a Primary Biliary Cirrhosis Mailing List’, Journal of Medical Internet Research , 7(1): e10.
22.
Lave, J. and Wenger, E. ( 1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23.
Pomerantz, A. ( 1984) ‘Agreement and Disagreement with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes’, in J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds) Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 57-101. New York: Cambridge University Press.
24.
Sacks, H. ( 1972) ‘On the Analyzability of Stories by Children’ , in J. Gumperz and D. Hymes (eds) Directions in Sociolinguistics. The Ethnography of Communication, pp. 325-45. Oxford: Blackwell.
25.
Sacks, H. ( 1987) ‘On the Preference for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in Conversation’, in G. Button and J.R.E. Lee (eds) Talk and Social Organization, pp. 54-69. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
26.
Sandaunet, A. ( 2008) ‘The Challenge of Fitting In: Non-participation and Withdrawal from an Online Self-help Group for Breast Cancer Patients’ , Sociology of Health30(1): 131-44.
27.
Schegloff, E. ( 2007a) ‘A Tutorial on Membership Categorization’ , Journal of Pragmatics39: 462-82.
28.
Schegloff, E. ( 2007b) Sequence Organization in Interaction. A Primer to Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29.
Schulz, P.N. ( 2002) ‘Providing Information to Patients with a Rare Cancer: Using Internet Discussion Forums to Address the Needs of Patients with Medullary Thryoid Carcinoma’, Clinical Journal of Oncology6: 219-22.
30.
Sixsmith, J. and Murray, C.D. ( 2001) ‘Ethical Issues in the Documentary Data Analysis of Internet Posts and Archives’, Qualitative Health Research11(3): 423-42.
31.
Sneijder, P. and te Molder, H. ( 2005) ‘Moral Logic and Logical Morality: Attributions of Responsibility and Blame in Online Discourse on Veganism’, Discourse & Society16(5): 675-96.
32.
Stommel, W. ( 2008) ‘Conversation Analysis and Community of Practice: An Approach to Studying Online Community’, in J. Androutsopoulos and M. Beißwenger (eds) Data and Methods in Computer-mediated Discourse Analysis . Language@internet5: art.5.
33.
Stommel, W. ( 2009) Entering an Online Support Group on Eating Disorders: A Discourse Analysis. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
34.
Ten Have, P. ( 2007) Doing Conversation Analysis. London : Sage.
35.
Treasure, J., Schmidt, U. and van Furth, E. ( 2005) The Essential Handbook of Eating Disorders. Chichester: Wiley.
36.
Vayreda, A. and Antaki, C.(2009) ‘Social Support and Unsolicited Advice in a Bipolar Disorder Online Forum’, Qualitative Health Research19(7): 931-42.
37.
Wenger, E. ( 2004) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38.
Winzelberg, A. ( 1997) ‘The Analysis of an Electronic Support Group for Individuals with Eating Disorders’, Computers in Human Behavior13(3): 393-407.
