Boundaries of Self and Reality Online

Implications of Digitally Constructed Realities

Jayne Gackenbach,Johnathan Bown

• Publisher: Academic Press
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9780128041741
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Digital Marketing
• Index: Business

As technology continues to rapidly advance, individuals and society are profoundly changed. So too are the tools used to measure this universe and, therefore, our understanding of reality improves. Boundaries of Self and Reality Online examines the idea that technological advances associated with the Internet are moving us in multiple domains toward various "edges." These edges range from self, to society, to relationships, and even to the very nature of reality. Boundaries are dissolving and we are redefining the elements of identity. The book begins with explorations of the digitally constructed self and the relationship between the individual and technological reality. Then, the focus shifts to society at large and includes a contribution from Chinese researchers about the isolated Chinese Internet. The later chapters of the book explore digital reality at large, including discussions on virtual reality, Web consciousness, and digital physics.

• Cyberpsychology architecture
• Video games as a tool for self-understanding
• Avatars and the meaning behind them
• Game transfer phenomena
• A Jungian perspective on technology
• Politics of social media
• The history and science of video game play
• Transcendent virtual reality experiences
• The theophoric quality of video games

Chapter 1

The Dimensions of Cyberpsychology Architecture

John Suler Rider University, Lawrenceville, NJ, United States

Abstract

Cyberspace is psychological space; an extension of our individual and collective minds. How we react to the different environments within this space—be it social media, games, chat, text messaging, video, exotic virtual worlds, or email—depends on how that particular environment is constructed using the Eight Dimensions of Cyberpsychology Architecture: (1) Identity (the presentation of self); (2) Social (interpersonal relationships and groups); (3) Interactive (interface and human/computer interaction); (4) Text (long and short forms of text communication); (5) Sensory (activation of some or all of the five senses); (6) Reality (true-to-life and imaginative features); (7) Temporal (the experience and use of time); and (8) Physical (the role of the physical body and physical environment). The power of cyberspace arises from its versatility in developing, combining, and minimizing or maximizing these eight dimensions in unique ways. Cyberpsychology Architecture serves as a useful transdisciplinary theory in analyzing the psychological impact of different digital environments, assessing an individual's digital lifestyle, and investigating critical issues in cyberpsychology.

Keywords

Architecture; Cyberpsychology; Dimensions; Identity; Interactive; Physical; Reality; Sensory; Social; Temporal; Text

Cyberspace is psychological space, a projection of the individual and collective human mind, which is why the term “cyberspace” itself is valuable. Both consciously and unconsciously we perceive this realm on the other side of our screen portals as an extension of our psyches, a territory that reflects our personalities, beliefs, and lifestyles. Early psychological studies identified how this online world entails a blurring of the boundary between mind-space and machine-space (Suler, 1996; Turkle, 1995). We experience ourselves as existing within an intermediate zone between self and other. From the perspective of traditional psychological theories, this space can be conceptualized as an intersubjective or interpersonal field (Atwood & Stolorow, 1984; Stern, 2015; Sullivan, 1953), a transitional or transformational space (Bollas, 1986; Winnicott, 1971), a territory that is part me, part other, and that provides a venue for self expression, interpersonal discovery, play, creativity, and, unfortunately, the acting out of psychopathology. In the context of such traditional theories, the digital world is a unique psychological space because it is mediated by computers that provide unprecedented speed in the processing of information, resulting in a wide variety of experiences and levels of interactivity not possible in conventional media. The design of different computer-generated spaces shapes the projected manifestation and interaction of self and other, hence determining the psychological impact of those spaces.

Cyberpsychology is then an inherently interdisciplinary or even transdisciplinary field, combining an appreciation of the technical aspects of online environments with an appreciation of the psyche. This holistic understanding of humans in the digital age can be founded on a theory that elucidates the unique features or “architecture” of each online environment (Suler, 2016). This cyberpsychology architecture consists of eight interlocking dimensions that regulate our experience of different digital spaces. Each dimension reflects computer-generated aspects of how a particular online environment operates, how the human psyche manifests itself there, as well as how the mind itself works. Different environments—such as social media, video-conferencing, games, avatar worlds, and email—combine the eight dimensions with varying emphasis. The essential questions concerning any particular environment are what dimensions it emphasizes, what dimensions it does not, and in what specific ways. The psychological power of the digital world comes from its versatility in developing, combining, and minimizing or maximizing these eight dimensions for outcomes that are practical, creative, and sometimes unpredictable.

The Identity Dimension: Who Am I?

Identity, the sense of self, constitutes the first dimension of cyberpsychology architecture, just as it has been a fundamental concept in traditional psychological, sociological, and philosophical discourse. From the perspective of cyberpsychology, all of the other dimensions of the architecture are tributaries that feed into identity.

The identity dimension of an online domain is determined by the options it provides people for establishing who they are, what they express about themselves, what they hide, and how they transform themselves—transformations often based on idealized self-concepts, what Walther (1996) called the hyperpersonal self. The digital world allows individuals to narrowly or fully depict aspects of their “real” identities from their in-person lifestyles, to establish their online selves de novo as fantasy creations, or to construct something in between as a mixture of a genuine and imagined self. The many different types of online environments can lead to a decentered, dissociated, and multiplied expression of self (Turkle, 1995), while also offering opportunities for discovering previously unconscious aspects of identity, which can lead to a more individuated, cohesive sense of self. The Internet even offers the possibility of negating identity by adopting varying degrees of anonymity and invisibility. The identity dimension includes all the software vehicles for self-presentation provided by a particular online environment, including how people consciously and unconsciously use or avoid them, as well as the healthy or pathological aspects of their identities that manifest in that environment.

Usernames, biography profiles, photographs of oneself, and avatars are all commonly employed tools for establishing identity when people first enter a new online environment. Once they begin participating in it, they must grapple with the different alternatives for defining themselves: communicating via long or short text posts; uploading pictures or video that show how they look, sound, and behave, or that reveal their home, work, and social places; reposting other people’s content serves the function of self-expression by proxy (Suler, 2016). The social norms of an online community might encourage people to portray themselves in a way that accurately reflects their real-world selves, as in traditional social media like Facebook. The norms might encourage them to adopt imaginary identities, as in games. Or the norms might create an identity dimension that mixes reality and fantasy.

Personal identity becomes compromised when people strive to maintain an ongoing symbiotic connection to others online in order to receive constant acknowledgment of their thoughts and feelings, a need that can inadvertently backfire: by forgetting how to self-reflect while being alone, one loses track of the intrapsychic boundaries that define an individuated, separated identity (Turkle, 2012). A related problem is the tendency for people to allow their self-expression in social media to become dictated by the dependency need for attaining affirmation from their online audience. Social tokens such as “likes” serve as a form of applause that selectively reinforces the expression of identity. People post items about themselves that they think others will reward with a “buttonized” reaction. They become what others seem to want them to be.

The identity dimension includes the intersection between one’s online and offline selves, how the two parallel each other, differ from each other, and can be unified if there are discrepancies, as suggested by the integration principle that calls for the carry-over of online behaviors into the offline world, and vice versa (Suler, 2016). It is the balance and combination of online and offline identity that maximizes wellbeing. Understanding the dynamics of this unified, balanced sense of self will be a critical tool in the attempts of cyberpsychologists to address what has become a very problematic byproduct of our technological age: the various types of Internet compulsions, including cybersex, gaming, gambling, day trading, shopping, and social media addiction (Greenfield, 1999; Suler, 1999; Young, 1998). For all the different forms of healthy and pathological expressions of identity in cyberspace, the person–situation interaction of character type with the qualities of the online environment plays an important role. People chose a particular environment according to their personality dynamics, but the environment in turn influences their expression and development of self, often in ways unconscious to the person.

The Social Dimension: Who Are We?

The social dimension pertains to all interpersonal aspects of cyberspace, including relationships that are one-to-one, one-to-many, many-to-one, strong and intimate, and weak or loose ties. It entails the assessment of how many people a person interacts with, who those people are, the purpose of those social activities, and the interpersonal strategies employed. Any tools an online environment provides its members to locate, gather, and communicate publicly or privately with others are features of its social dimension. Although the social dimension intertwines intimately with the identity dimension due to the synergistic interaction between interpersonal relationships and individual identity, cyberspace does provide options for a robust expression of identity with a minimally developed social dimension, as with people in social media who operate in a performing or “expressive” mode by posting regularly but without responding to others who might react to their posts. By contrast, people who operate in a “receptive” mode view other people’s online behavior while participating very little themselves (Suler, 2016).

When online, people can communicate with dozens, hundreds, thousands, and even millions of people from all walks of life. They can juggle many relationships in a short period of time or even at the same time, as in text messaging, without other people necessarily being aware of their social multitasking. By posting to social networks they create their own personal audience consisting of people who share even the most esoteric of interests. Using a search engine they can scan the vast online world to focus their attention onto particular types of people. Over time online environments have become increasingly more powerful in their tools for searching, filtering, and contacting almost any kind of person or group, which is an important feature of their social dimension.

People make conscious decisions in selecting others who share similar interests and backgrounds, or whose personalities are compatible with their own. However, the ability to sift through so many possibilities for developing online contacts also opens the door to unconscious influences stemming from past relationships, such as transference reactions and other parataxic distortions. In addition to conscious preferences, people online act on unconscious expectations and needs when selecting colleagues, friends, lovers, and enemies. As an experienced online user once said to me, “Everywhere I go in cyberspace, I keep running into the same kinds of people!” This unconscious filtering process can be sensitive, powerful, and totally misleading. A common example involves twinship transferences (Kohut, 1977) in which people with shared interests join forces online as they grow convinced of their deeply meaningful bond, only later to witness their relationships dissolve or explode in conflict when they discover their supposed alter-egos have needs that are incompatible with their own. Misunderstandings and conflicts in online relationships and groups, especially when communication entails only typed text, are common due to interpersonal misperceptions arising from transference reactions. When machine intelligence suggests possible contacts to a user based on the user’s past choices, an important question is whether these suggestions contribute to an unproductive restriction in the person’s interpersonal sphere.

Online romances are a particularly powerful example of how relationships in cyberspace can be enriching or simply turn into an outlet for problematic transference reactions. In online dating sites people often play with love, sexuality, and the presentation of themselves as the quintessential romantic partner (Whitty & Carr, 2006). They might unrealistically glorify themselves or their companions. The degree to which people engage such playing-at-love varies, most likely depending on the person’s susceptibility to idealizing and twinship transferences (Kohut, 1977). Understanding how the acceleration and amplification of transference in cyberspace affects communication with lovers, family, friends, colleagues, and strangers is an important tool in assessing the social dimension of a person’s online lifestyle.

In this social dimension of cyberpsychology architecture, people who do not establish presence in the environment are as important as the people who do. Self-selected membership and degree of participation will shape the interpersonal culture. People bring their mental sets with them, ways of thinking that are very different from others who cannot enter the environment, have no desire to do so, or who belong but rarely contribute. As long as the digital divide persists, the social dimension of the Internet as a whole will be determined directly by the people who access it, and indirectly by those who do not.

The Interactive Dimension: How Do I Do This?

The interactive dimension entails how well people can understand, navigate, control, and modify an online environment. Here enters the discipline of human–computer interaction (HCI), as first described by Card, Moran, and Newell (1983), which involves the design of a computer interface that is more user-friendly because it parallels how humans intuitively perceive, think, and behave. The more readily people can immerse themselves into an online domain, the more quickly it becomes a transitional space, an extension of their minds. The more customizable it is, the more they can express their identity, shape their experiences, and feel emotionally invested and present in that environment. As the interactive power of a device increases, so does its intrapsychic power as a self-object that sustains one’s sense of identity (Kohut, 1977). A purely informational website has minimal interactive qualities. Sophisticated avatar worlds possess high interactivity in the many opportunities people have to create visual representations of themselves, to venture into a variety of locations within the world, to construct their own objects and dwellings, and to form relationships with others. A highly interactive environment tends to be more complicated, requiring a steeper learning curve and greater skill, which becomes a challenging task when people undergo media transitions (Suler, 2016). For complicated environments, an effective human–computer interface is critical.

No matter how sophisticated electronic tools become, there will always be moments when they fail, when the machine does not work properly, or ...