Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century - ISSN: 1064-4326   April 1997 - Volume 5, Number 1-2, pp. 7-18

FRAGMENTED BY TECHNOLOGIES [1]: A COMMUNITY IN CYBERSPACE

MIKE DAVIS

INTRODUCTION

The emergence of the Internet as a potential medium of communication raises a number of issues, not least among them, whether the sense of community that may arise in face-to-face (F2F) interaction will be possible to replicate in virtual space. In other words, will computer mediated communication (CMC) allow people, who may be distant in time and space, context and culture from one another, to manifest some or all of the characteristics of groups in physical and temporal contact.

There does seem to be some evidence to support the view that the various channels of CMC (email, synchronous and asynchronous fora) can help sustain links that already exist. Friends and colleagues find email readily accessible - if you are an academic, or you have a phone and a modem, (but access is an issue not addressed in this paper.) Often thought of as an emergent register (Ferrera et al, 1991) email communication possesses neither the formality of written correspondence nor the immediacy and ethereal nature of telephone conversations, but does have some significance for its regular users. (see for example, Miller, 1994).

There is also evidence to suggest that moderately successful interaction can arise from the increasing number of computer-mediated courses that build on an initial, intensive F2F contact and lead to asynchronous forms of communication on agreed themes. (Fowell et al, 1995; CMC in HE Newsletters passim; Walther, 1996).

+ Page 8 +

ELECTRONIC DISCUSSION GROUPS AND INTERNATIONAL ADULT EDUCATION

My original intention in this paper was to report on the extent to which it has been possible to make use of some of this potential in order to create a community among a diverse group of adult education students and faculty based in two institutions: one in the UK and the other in the USA. The association we had in mind from May 1995 was one that would include students and faculty from two departments of education, coming together in an electronic discussion group, primarily to extend the notion of a community of scholars in adult education, but also with the specific and more instrumental idea of identifying common research interests.

An electronic discussion group was set up and there was agreement that discussion would be facilitated, at least in the first instance, in order to overcome some of the difficulties associated with bringing together two diverse groups of people separated by 4,000 miles and five time zones. The discussion group was thought of as no more than an ice breaking activity: to give people the chance to 'hear their voice' in the 'space' that we had created between us. At this point, it became clear that the intention to seek other than an analogy to F2F interaction was going to be a transparent necessity. The characteristics of cyberspace which were identified, conspired with other more mundane matters (recruitment, induction, familiarity) and some less so: the main one being the much slower speed that CMC achieves. (see also Walther, 1996) Far more significant was the nature of the opening activities.

In order to overcome the problems associated with serial recruitment (that, in fact, stretched over a four month period), the first, informal task was to write a brief biographical statement and to locate the self within the adult education community. Over twenty people completed this activity. Following that was to be the first community building activity, based on an activity described by Brookfield (Mezirow 1990), to write a critical incident account about a successful experience either as a student or as a teacher, during the previous year. Less than 15 people completed this embargoed activity and there was a delay then as I tried to work out in what direction to proceed, given the apparent failure of this first activity. The discussion group continued to be facilitated, but on an episodic basis, until summer, 1996. A more detailed exploration of the experience can be found in Davis and Holt (in press).

+ Page 9 +

However, this experience and the literature and some other anecdotal evidence combined to persuade me that it would be helpful to re-examine some of the foundational thinking about notions of community and interaction, as well as cyberspace, before considering the extent to which the process might be considered effective as a form of international community building. This paper, therefore, is an examination of some of the, often conflicting and competing, characteristics of cyberspace, drawn from a number of fairly eclectic sources. It is not intended to be an authoritative or final statement. Rather, a speculation about what educators need to consider when setting up listservs and other kinds of computer mediated communication.

Of space and the social [3].

Notions of community are fairly elusive, but they tend to encompass qualities of relationships; shared tasks; a sense of 'self' in relation to 'other'; interdependence; and belonging. Conventionally, and because of the difficulties of maintaining essential communication over distance, they must also occupy some shared space, often with clearly identifiable boundaries. Etzioni called it the 'I and We' paradigm:

The idea that both individual and community have a basic moral standing; neither is secondary or derivative. [...] The We signifies social, cultural and political, hence historical and institutional forces, which shape the collective factor - the community. (Etzioni 1991, 137)

This has powerful resonances in some sections of western society, and seems to hark back to a 'better' premodern era before the alienating impact of rationalism, industrialisation and urbanisation. The prevailing image is of a traditional life, characterised by regular, personal contact among friends. Modernism, however, corrupted this idyllic scene (Jensen, 1990) and postmodernism - of which the Internet is a feature - somehow appears to offer an opportunity to recover its qualities. Central to the notion of community is interaction amongst its membership: normally the exchange of ideas, thoughts, feelings, manifested in language, but supported by a wide range of paralinguistic features. This does not preclude silence, the significance of which will become apparent later in this paper, but at least the idea that if there is silence, it has some shared significance, as in the case of English Quakers who saw a refusal to speak as ideological commitment (Gal, 1991). Under

+ Page 10 +

normal social conditions, however, there is an expectation within a community that interaction of some kind will take place: that people will willingly engage in social exchange and maximise their roles within the social economy (Miller, 1993).

However, both of these definitions fall short of lived experience. The sense of community is an expression of romantic idealism that predates the impact of the modern, before the world became 'despoiled by overdevelopment, overpopulation and time-release environmental poisons' (Robins, 138); in Blake's cosmology, "Jerusalem". Similarly, social interaction as depicted above, ignores the often brutal reality of intragroup behaviour with all of its manifestations of authority, dependence, flight/fight, (dis)enchantment, etc. (e.g. Luft, 1970). Furthermore, in order to explore the potential to replicate those existential intentions of interaction in F-2-F communities, it is necessary to examine some of the peculiar characteristics of what Rheingold (1993) and others call 'virtual community' or 'nonspace'. Because they compete and contradict and are resistant to a precise taxonomy, they are presented in alphabetical order.

Antinomy

In the U.S. syndicated cartoon 'Cathy', the character is experimenting with online chat and subsequent email. She identifies, however, a particular feature of cyberspace interaction when she asks herself: Do the same rules apply to online relationships, or is there some whole new secret set of rules that we can only figure out through a brand new series of personal humiliations?!!

The capacity that users have to import their normative understanding from other social contexts is hardly new nor surprising given that they are the product of contingent social experiences over years. Learning the new, when there are no clues other than what is in text form on the screen, is a source of understandable caution. Attempts to create 'netiquette' do not prevent 'flaming' - aggressive and hostile communication - or its threat , that often forces others into silence (see also lurking).

Atomisation

The Panopticon creates the capacity to see and not be seen, or in the context of cyberspace, to read and not be read. The corollary of this "all seeing eye" is isolation within, and atomisation of, society. What cyberspace has the capacity to create is the reduction of the mass to individual social

+ Page 11 +

agency. There are two dimensions to this, but with the same outcome: in the one, the (over)use of a technology to eliminate F-2-F interaction when F-2-F is both possible and desirable; and in the other, "in the effort to bring others closer together, network technologies have placed a distance between people in the same location" (Lajoie 1995, 154).

Carnival/Mardi Gras (see Antinomy)

Carnival, in those countries that celebrate it, is a time when the "normal" cultural rules do not apply. Indeed, if there is a rule, it is that normal cultural rules do not apply. The capacity for this state to exist in cyberspace is always there in its potential to disrupt.

Decentralisation

The anarchic nature of the Internet, with its millions of individual users and its thousands of loose associations (listservs, Usenet groups etc.) has made the notion of control an impossibility, even if it were desirable. It has been described metaphorically as a cloud (Nguyen & Alexander, 1996). The significance is two fold: one is the uncontrollable nature of cyberspace; and the other, its lack of focus and order. It is multi dimensional and polyvocal and it has lost temporal linearity.

Disembodiment

The manifestation of 'self' and communality in cyberspace is mediated entirely through text, and in some sectors, this has been seen as among its strengths. As Clark (1995) puts it:

Concepts of physical beauty are holdovers from MEAT [4 ] space. On the net they don't apply. We are all just bits and bytes blowing in the phosphor stream (p 124).

What this has led to is a range of re-embodiments and re-inventions: participants, particularly in chat lines, engage in gender bending (Spender 1995), changing age, name, identity, and creating 'bodily' images to suit whatever purpose they have in mind.

Hyperpersonal communication (see intensification)

Joseph Walther (1996) argues that there are three forms of communication in cyberspace: impersonal, interpersonal, and what he calls hyperpersonal. The two former are also manifestations of behaviour in F2F communication, by hyperpersonal communication is a consequence of the slow, but inexorable growth of interpersonal communication that arises from asynchronous communication. It happens when:

+ Page 12 +

users experience commonality, are self-aware, physically separated, and communicating via a limited cues channel [5] which allows them to selectively self-present and edit; to construct and reciprocate representations of their partners and relations without the interference of environmental reality. (Walther 1996, 19)

Impersonality

Particularly in task-based communities, this seems to have a positive effect in that it gives the group more time to deal with the instrumental task in hand (Walther, 1996, 4). As Phillips and Santoro (1989) report: computerised communication steers users away from consideration of irrelevant interpersonal and theoretical issues by focusing attention on the process and content of problem solving discussion. (p. 152). This is a consequence of a decline in social presence that is manifested in F-2-F communication by physical appearance, style, accent, mood, charisma. The other outcome is the potential for overt hostility of the kind unlikely to be found in F-2-F interaction, and characterised by Walther as uninhibited and depersonalised behaviour.

Intensification

In conditions of F-2-F communication, the feedback loop provides senders and receivers with just enough information to keep the communication lines open. Because of the capacity to censor messages in ways not possible in F-2-F communication, the images of self are more carefully and selectively sent and perceived. The consequence of this is what Walther (Walther 1996, 16) calls an 'intensification loop' and while it is normally thought of as confirming favourable qualities, it also has within it the capacity to do the opposite.

Little Narrative

In the same way that autobiographical writing has got the capacity to give voice to the voiceless, cyberspace can provide users with almost unlimited narrative space and a potential audience of millions. As Katz (1994) wrote:

technology is breaking down the notion of few-to-many communications. [...] the big idea behind cyber-tales is that for the first time, the many are talking to the many ... they can be their own producers, agents, editors and audiences. Their stories are becoming more and more idiosyncratic, interactive and individualistic, told in different forums to diverse audiences in different ways.

+ Page 13 +

While this may be a contribution towards the democraticisation of media within modernism, it is also a rejection of the tyranny of the modern through expressions of "incredulity towards meta-narratives, especially that of progress and its variants deriving from the Enlightenment." (Poster 1995, 91) The potential for the centre not be able to hold is already apparent through what are seen as the proliferation of little narratives.

Lurking

To lurk is to cope with some of the difficulties of being in cyberspace: to be present but not to participate by writing. As Argyle (1995) says:

... lurking is participation by watching without revealing your presence in the group. The catch is, others may not know you are there, but you know you are, and so you are as involved as they are. You are still part of the group (p. 137).

This is, I believe, the dominant form of behaviour on many lists.

Ownership

Despite some attempts to address legal and intellectual ownership of the contents of cyberspace, this continues to be complex, if not increasingly so, as it begins to challenge notions of originality. As Spender (1995), quoting Dorner writes: "As any self-respecting deconstructionist will tell you, any text is the product of other texts".

Representations of self

"On the Internet, nobody knows you are a dog" [6]. Despite Rousseau's claims otherwise, (Rousseau, 1953) the representation of self is an uncertain enough adventure in any form of text, (see, for example, Marcus, 1994) and in cyberspace, there is little difference. Indeed, the very anonymity of cyberspace occupancy can create the potential for an even bigger capacity for what Feenberg has called highly controlled forms of self presentation. He goes on:

The "I" who presents you with the "me-as-text" is not exactly the same "I" who appears in face-to-face encounters. (Feenberg, 272).

+ Page 14 +

CONCLUSIONS

By the time the decision was made to close the electronic discussion group, it was fairly quiet; the volume of traffic varied but rarely exceeded three messages per week. There is some evidence to suggest that lurking was the predominant activity. Only three people actually left the group, one because of a work move which deprived her of access to email. Anecdotal evidence told me that people were writing one-to-one; that there was some hesitant discussions about discussion group activity that took place F-2-F. I also did see some evidence of the atomisation theory: that there was a stiffness about those discussions that did not manifest itself in other deliberations.

It was naive to assume that an alternative typology would emerge readily from extrapolation of F-2-F interaction. Community in cyberspace is quite different but the precise characteristics have yet to be identified, and this small scale venture did little to produce new theory. What it did do, however, was cause me to pause and think about some of the assumptions I and others made when setting up the electronic discussion group. It is my belief that we can become mesmerised by the technology and we can become encouraged to assume that its magical qualities will overcome the behaviours that often make communication and collaboration in F-2-F so troublesome. Further research is needed. For myself, this will take the form of a detailed examination of the patterns of communication and the characteristics of community that emerge from a joint class taught between the Centre for Adult and Higher Education at the University of Manchester and the Department of Adult Education, University of Georgia in the summer of 1997. This course will have both F-2-F and CMC components and it is hoped that the data generated will provide opportunity to theorise about the virtual group meeting in cyberspace.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Many thanks to Editor Susan Barnes, Zane Berge and an anonymous reviewer for assistance in developing this paper to its final form. The original research was supported by a grant from the Research and Graduate School of Education, University of Manchester, UK.

+ Page 15 +

FOOTNOTES

[1] A paraphrase of Marshall McLuhan paraphrasing William Blake who in a word, sees man as fragmented by his technologies.

[2] First published in a slightly different form as Email conferencing: creating and maintaining a virtual community in Zukas, M (ed.), Diversity and Development: Futures in the education of adults. Leeds, UK: SCUTREA.

[3] According to Steven Jones in Cyberspace, the missing ingredients

[4] Cybertalk for the physical body

[5] Text only - without additional paralinguistic features

[6] One dog to another dog in P. Steiner cartoon, The New Yorker, 1993

REFERENCES

Argyle, K. (1996). Life after death. In R. Shields, (Ed.), Cultures of Internet: virtual spaces, real histories, living bodies. London: Sage.

Brookfield, S. (1990). Using critical incidents to explore learners' assumptions. In J. Mezirow & Associates (Eds.), Fostering critical reflection in adulthood. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Clark, N. (1995). Rear-view mirrorshades: the recursive generation of the cyberbody. In M. Featherstone & R. Burrows (Eds.), Cyberspace, cyberbodies, cyberpunk: cultures of technological embodiment. London: Sage.

CMC in HE Newsletter, University of Lancaster.

Davis, M. & Holt, M. (proposed): having.problems@cm.com: new ways to miss the point.

Etzioni, A. (1991). The responsive society. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Feenberg, A. (1989). A user's guide to the pragmatics of computer mediated communication. Semiotica, 75, 257-278.

Ferrara, A., Brunner, H. & Whittemore, G. (1991). Interactive written discourse as an emergent register. Written Communication, 8, 8-34.

+ Page 16 +

Fowell, S., Levy, P. & Riding, P. (1995) Using computer mediated communication to support student-led collaborative learning. In J. Darby & J. Martin (Eds.), Active Learning 2 July 1995.

Gal, S. (1991). Between speech and silence: the problematics of research in language and gender. In M. di Leonardo (Ed.), Gender at the crossroads of knowledge. Berkeley, University of California Press.

Jensen, J. (1990). Redeeming modernity. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Jones, S. (1995). Understanding community in the information age. In S. Jones (Ed.), Cybersociety. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Katz, J. (1994). The tales they tell in cyberspace are a whole other story. Los Angeles Times 4th October, 1994.

Lajoie, M. (1996). Psychoanalysis and cyberspace. In R. Shields (Ed.), Cultures of Internet: virtual spaces, real histories, living bodies. London: Sage.

Luft, J. (1970). Group processes: an introduction to group dynamics. Third edition. Palo Alto, CA, Mayfield.

McLaughlin, M., Osborne, K. & Smith, C. (1995). Standards of conduct on Usenet. In S. Jones (Ed.), Cybersociety. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

McLuhan, M. (1967). Understanding media: the extensions of man. London: Sphere.

Marcus, L. (1994). Auto/biographical discourse: theory, criticism, practice. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Miller, N. (1993). Personal experience, adult learning and social research. South Australia: University of South Australia.

Miller, N. (1994). The formation of academic identities: relationships, reference groups and networks in the adult education community. In P. Armstrong, B. Bright & M. Zukas, M (Eds.), Reflecting on changing practices, contexts and identities. Leeds: SCUTREA.

Nguyen, D. & Alexander, J. (1996). The coming of cyberspacetime and the end of polity. In Shields, R. (Ed.), Cultures of Internet: virtual spaces, real histories, living bodies. London: Sage.

+ Page 17 +

Phillips, G. & Santoro, G. (1989). Teaching group discussion via computer mediated communication. Communication Education 38, 151-161.

Poster, M. (1995). Postmodern virualities. In M. Featherstone & R. Burrows (Eds.), Cyberspace, cyberbodies, cyberpunk: cultures of technological embodiment. London: Sage.

Rheingold, H. (1993). A slice of life in my virtual community. In L Harasim (Ed.), Global Networks. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Robins, K. (1995). Cyberspace and the world we live in. In M. Featherstone & R. Burrows, (Eds.), Cyberspace, cyberbodies, cyberpunk: cultures of technological embodiment. London: Sage.

Rousseau, J. (1778/1953). Confessions. (Trans. J. Cohen). Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Shields, R. (1996). Introduction: Virtual spaces, real histories and living bodies. In R. Shields (Ed.), Cultures of Internet: virtual spaces, real histories, living bodies, London, Sage.

Spender, D. (1995). Nattering on the net. Melbourne: Spiniflex.

Walther, B. (1996). Computer-Mediated Communication: Impersonal, Interpersonal and Hyperpersonal Interaction. Communication Research. 23, 1.

Address for correspondence:

Mike Davis

mike.davis@man.ac.uk

100701.247@compuserve.com

+ Page 18 +

Mike Davis is a Lecturer in Adult Education at the University of Manchester, UK, where he coordinatesand teaches on the Masters Programme in Training and Development. His research interests include group dynamics,experiential learning, auto/biography in adult education and computer-mediated communication. He has published articles and book chapters in these areas and has also co-written text books for High School English, including a new edition of "The Selected Poems of William Blake."

Copyright Statement Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century © 1997 The Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Copyright of individual articles in this publication is retained by the individual authors. Copyright of the compilation as a whole is held by AECT. It is asked that any republication of this article state that the article was first published in IPCT-J. Contributions to IPCT-J can be submitted by electronic mail in APA style to: Susan Barnes, Editor SBBARNES@PIPLELINE.COM or BARNES@MURRAY.FORDHAM.EDU