Monday, September 17, 2007

4, Option 2: Edit Profile—Save Changes

The frequency of digital deception and selective self-presentation on the Internet seems to depend on the type of space we are analyzing. In Catalina’s study, the subjects were users of online dating websites and therefore, were individuals who were most likely sifting through strangers’ online profiles in search of romance. However, many Facebook users simply utilize the space to network with friends, classmates, and others who they frequently already have a “real-life” connection to (and therefore, users could be better able to detect deception).


After explaining the simple 1 (completely inaccurate) to 5 (completely accurate) scale to my friend “Jane,” I had her rate each element of her Facebook profile on accuracy. Initially to my surprise, she ranked every single aspect of her profile as a 5. Jane seemed to be telling the truth about all of the assessment signals and conventional signals, which according to Donath (1999), represent our identity in the CMC environment. The assessment signals found on Jane’s profile provide connections to her “offline” identity—such as her phone number, e-mail address, and home town. For example, her e-mail address ends in @cornell.edu, signifying that she is intelligent and attends an Ivy League University. The conventional signals are only conventionally associated with characteristics of herself. In her Facebook profile, conventional signals include the information found in her interests and various “favorites.”


Looking through her profile, I found no trace of digital deception. It didn’t seem as though Jane was intentionally trying to be deceptive nor did I believe she was trying to create a false belief in the minds of her profile viewers. However, with the asynchronous structure of Facebook, Jane was given as much time as needed to strategically craft a Facebook profile in which she could convey her desired impression through selective self-presentation. Jane chose to use self-presentational tactics, such as self-descriptions and attitude expressions in order to portray herself in a positive light. For example, she chose to highlight good aspects of herself by listing some movies that would show her intellectual side and others that would reflect her humorous side. However, she omitted some other information that may not reflect her desired image as well; such as when she didn’t list the hardcore punk band that she likes under her favorite music.


What I found most interesting about Jane’s profile were the sections she chose not to fill out. When discussing identity-based digital deception, Hancock briefly refers to identity concealment—hiding or omitting aspects of one’s identity. Although my friend has been in a relationship for over a year now, her relationship status is not listed on her profile. On Facebook, I believe there is no kind of social association stronger than being listed as “in a relationship” with someone, since it publically links one individual to another (proclaiming their relationship to the Facebook world.) Some may say that Jane’s lack of inclusion of this important detail should be considered deception—however, unlike sites such as Match.com, the relationship sector of Facebook is not the primary aspect we are concerned about and therefore I believe inclusion should be a matter of preference.


Jane’s Facebook profile allowed me to recognize that selective self-presentation may play more of a role than digital deception in this space. Facebook is a place where people can carefully choose ways to present themselves and leave various things out rather than lying—after all, we can always edit our profiles.


Comments:
http://comm245red.blogspot.com/2007/09/4-of-nuns-and-fish.html
http://comm245red.blogspot.com/2007/09/lying-on-facebook-is-overrated.html

4 comments:

Anne Lucke said...

I also found similar results when looking at my friend's Facebook profile. She was honest about pretty much everything, but I believe there was a lot of selective self-presentation happening, whether it was only tagging good of herself or listing certain movies as her favorites. I also agree with you that the reason our friends' Facebooks didn't really go along with Catalina's findings is because Facebook isn't a dating site. People are trying to highlight different aspects of themselves, and others (such as what school they go to) are harder to hide.

Colleen O'Shea said...

Hi Alyssa,
I agree with you that Facebook, although it is similar in layout or concept to other online social networks like dating sites, is very different in the "real life aspect" you pointed out. Your facebook profile is open to constant scrutiny from the many bored facebook stalkers who you will have a good chance of running into or passing by everyday. As opposed to daters on a dating site, facebookers would tend to blatantly lie less becuase of the increased likelihood of being caught in one of those lies. I think that you are right in saying that selective self presentation plays a more actve role in facebook than actual digital deception.

Tyler Armstrong said...

I agree that selective self-presentation is the major theory at work in Facebook profiles. Down right lying and deception are almost impossible to get away with because we typically know most of our friends in the real world (aka face to face), as well as in an online context. Most people including myself aren't going to put a bad photo of themselves up as their profile picture, they are going to select the best possible one they can find. They aren't lying about their appearance by posting a picture of a super model; the picture is still them, but it is a more flattering and more positive image that they are putting out to the world. Also, I found that some people are just too lazy to list all of their favorite things. They aren't lying when they say their favorite movie is "The Little Mermaid", but they also aren't giving you the whole story, thus they are selectively self-presenting.

Mike Phillips said...

Hey Alyssa,

I enjoyed reading your post very much. I too examined a friend’s facebook profile and was surprised when she rated the accuracy of the sections of the profile with mostly 5s. My friend also left much information out of her profile, but I believe she did this for mostly practical reasons. I found it difficult to judge whether or not my friend was using any digital deception. On one hand, I did not believe that my friend intentionally left out information for the purpose of giving the people who view her profile a false idea of who she really is the non-facebook world. On the other hand, she must have gone through the thought process of what was going to make it onto the profile and what would be omitted. There had to be some self-presentation even if it wasn’t to the degree that she was being intentionally deceptive.

I thought it was interesting that you mentioned how you found it strange that your friend chose not update her relationship status on her profile. I remember my freshman year how some of the girls I knew would say that a relationship on campus really wasn’t “official” until it was “facebook official”, meaning that the two people would add each other to their profiles with the “in a relationship with” link. It made me laugh how a simple link on someone’s profile had become some sort of relationship “wedding band”.