Virtual methods design 0 Pre-print, uncorrected version of: Joinson, A.N. (in press) Internet Behaviour and the design of virtual methods. In C. Hine (Ed.). Virtual Methods: issues in social research on the Internet. Oxford: Berg. The Internet, and in particular the World Wide Web (WWW) has enabled social scientists to create a virtual laboratory where data can be collected 24 hours a day, across the globe, without the costs (time, transcription errors and financial) associated with more traditional methods of research. Just as the video camera revolutionized observation methods, so the Internet is fundamentally changing the ways in which we can observe, measure and report on the human condition and societal structures. However, despite the increasing popularity of the Internet as both a methodology and as the object of research, it is relatively rare for these two separate literatures to cross reference each other. In the present chapter, I will argue that an understanding of the social aspects of Internet behaviour is crucial to the effective design of Internet-based methodology. While the need for an appreciation of theorizing about online interaction is clear for qualitative methodologies, it is arguable that online experimental methods should also be seen within the context of a social interaction. First, people tend to respond to computers as social actors (Moon, 2000; Nass et al., 1996), and as such transfer modes of interaction used with other people to their interactions with new social technologies. Second, the flexibility of Internet-based (specifically World Wide Web) research methodology has encouraged people to experiment with ways to personalize the encounter between the researcher and the participant. So, it is not uncommon to Virtual methods design 1 encounter quite extensive information about the researcher or line drawings / smiley faces embedded within a survey (Nass et al., 1996; Tourangeau, 2004). Such techniques will tend to have unexpected effects: for instance, by encouraging participants to reciprocate disclosure (Moon, 2001; Joinson, 2001a), or alternatively, by increasing participants’ face-saving motivation (Paulus, 1984). Finally, it is possible that all writing, from diaries to the completion of web-based survey instruments, is conducted with an audience in mind. So, minor changes in the salience or type of audience, or in the identifiability of the author, may well have noticeable effects on the nature of the information disclosed by the research participant. Models of Internet behaviour Early theories of Internet behaviour (and more specifically computer-mediated communication or CMC) tended to focus on what was lost during Internet based interaction (Sproull and Kiesler, 1986). The lack of visual and feedback cues in CMC was invoked to predict that any interaction will tend to be rather formal and task-oriented, and will lack the richness of real-time face-to-face interaction (Daft and Lengel, 1984). For instance, Hiltz and Turoff (1978) reported only 14% of CMC groups’ communication was socio-emotional in content, compared to 33% in face-to-face groups. Rice and Love (1987) studied 2, 347 sentences exchanged using CMC: 28% were ‘positive’ socio- emotional messages, 4% negative socio-emotional messages and 71% were task-oriented messages. However, historical analyses strongly suggest that a loss of visual cues need not be accompanied by a concurrent reduction in the ‘socialness’ of interaction (see Joinson, Virtual methods design 2 2003). For instance, Standage (1998, p. 123) notes that ‘despite the apparently impersonal nature of communicating by wire, (the telegraph) was in fact an extremely subtle and intimate means of communication’. Fischer (1992) also notes that telephone executives bemoaned frivolous use of the telephone in internal memoranda, and actively discouraged social uses of the telephone until the 1920s. Despite this censure, the use of the telephone for intimacy became accepted and everyday. Other instances of intimate behaviour have been recorded via letter, flashlight, and radio / CB (see Joinson, 2003, for a summary). Clearly then, lack of visual or verbal cues need not lead an interaction to be task-oriented, unregulated or de-socialized. Indeed, more recent work on CMC suggests that it is this lack of cues that can lead CMC to be more highly social, regulated by norms and intimate than face-to-face interaction. An accumulating body of experimental evidence, first person accounts and observation research has shown that Internet-based communication can be characterised as highly socialised – perhaps even more social than face-to-face interaction (Rheingold, 1993; Walther, 1996). Moreover, issues of status and hierarchy transfer just as easily to Internet-based interactions (Spears et al., 2002), negating the contention that lack of cues leads to a reduction in concern for the audience or equalization effects. For instance, there is evidence that Internet communication can lead people to identify highly with relevant social groups and identities (Spears and Lea, 1992; Spears et al., 2002) and develop high levels of affiliation and liking (Walther, 1996). Internet relationships may well be characterized by idealization of the other partner (McKenna et al., 2002), leading to intense feelings and ‘just clicked’ experiences (Joinson, 2003). The prognosis for an Internet relationship is just as healthy as that for one formed face-to-face Virtual methods design 3 (McKenna et al., 2002). Perhaps the most widely recognized pro-social behaviour on the Internet is of particular importance to the use of the Internet as a research tool as well for building intimate relationships: self-disclosure. Wallace (1999, p. 151) notes that ‘The tendency to disclose more to a computer ... is an important ingredient of what seems to be happening on the Internet’. Self-disclosure via (or to) a computer has been studied in a number of different settings: for instance, in the medical field, increased levels of candid disclosure to a computer, as compared to face-to-face consultations, have been reported in psychiatric interviews and pre-interviews (Ferriter, 1993; Greist, Klein and VanCura, 1973). Robinson and West report that clients at a sexually transmitted disease clinic admit to more sexual partners, more previous visits and more symptoms to a computer than to a doctor (Robinson & West, 1992). When non-medical Internet behaviour is studied, similar findings also emerge. Parks and Floyd (1996) studied the relationships formed by Internet users. They also asked their participants to report the level of self-disclosure in their Internet relationships (by responding to statements such as ‘I usually tell this person exactly how I feel’ and ‘I would never tell this person anything intimate or personal about myself’). They found that people report disclosing significantly more in their Internet relationships compared to their real life relationships. Bargh et al. (2002) found evidence that people are more able to express their ‘true’ selves on the Internet, which may involve disclosing information about the self that would normally be socially unacceptable. Similarly, in their study of ‘coming out on the Internet’, McKenna and Bargh (1998, p682) argue that participation in Virtual methods design 4 online newsgroups gives people the benefit of ‘disclosing a long secret part of one’s self’. In the series of studies reported by Joinson (2001b), level of self- disclosure was measured using content analysis of transcripts of face-to-face and synchronous CMC discussions (Study one), and in conditions of visual anonymity and video links during CMC (Study two). In keeping with the predicted effect, self-disclosure was significantly higher when participants discussed using a CMC system as opposed to face to face, and when they were visually anonymous. Walther (1996, p. 17) termed this phenomenon ‘hyperpersonal communication’: that is, communication which is ‘more socially desirable than we tend to experience in parallel FtF interaction’. The most common aspect of CMC invoked to explain hyperpersonal communication is visual anonymity. For instance, social identity theorists (e.g. Spears and Lea, 1992; Spears et al., 2002) have argued that visual anonymity increases identification with a group by increasing perceived homogeneity of the group (because you cannot see how varied the group is). McKenna et al. (2002) have argued that visual anonymity creates a ‘strangers on the train’ experience, where the social cost of self- disclosure is reduced through relative anonymity (and the reduction in a person’s power to use the disclosed information against the discloser). Alternatively, anonymity during CMC (in particular isolation) has been argued to increase people’s focus on their own attitudes and emotions (Matheson and Zanna, 1988), which would increase self- disclosure (Joinson, 2001b). Tidwell and Walther (2002) have argued that high levels of disclosure online are motivated by a desire to reduce uncertainty within an interaction. Virtual methods design 5 And Joinson (2003) has noted that simply the act of having to write may increase disclosure through the need to express explicitly one’s emotions and attitudes. It is also plausible that people choose the Internet specifically because they wish to disclose information, and require a degree of anonymity. For instance, an individual may well choose to post an intimate question to a health bulletin board rather than visit their medical centre. Nicholas et al.