Media construction of virtual identity

Identity is the “understanding of who we are” and how we see ourselves in relation to others

and it is continuously formed through social interaction (Giddens 2009, p 256; Jones 1998).

While previous communication media created new social realms and therefore new ways to

think of human identity, as books did after the invention of the printing press, it is now

believed that computer technology are doing the same in the post-modern era (Poster n. a;

Rheingold 2000; Visions of 2010). However, there is one fundamental difference. The new

realms do not exist in the real world, but on the internet. Virtual reality is a term used to

explain the “metaphorical ‘places’ and ‘spaces’ created by or within [online] communication

networks” (Lister et al. 2003, p 35). Some theorists believe that virtual reality is a dangerous

term in the way that it suggests that reality can take multiple forms. This has led to the belief

that computer-mediated communication leads individuals to lead parallel lives with parallel

identities, often choosing their virtual identity over their real-life identity, using the virtual

worlds as an escape from the real world (Gunkel 2010; Turkle 1995; Poster n. a; Visions of

2010). This essay will critically look at the new virtual realms of communication, with the

internet as a medium, to see if individuals are assuming virtual or online identities, different

from their real-life, offline identities.

There are two parts to identity: Personal; describing a person’s individual appearance and

characteristics; and social; describing an individual’s relationship with the various groups it

associates its identity with (Giddens 2009; Berger 1995). There is also a third part to identity;

embodiment - the sense of self needs a person’s body to belong to as the body plays a big part

in communication (Giddens 2009; Jones 1998). Social interaction is not just communication

through words, but the relationship between the words spoken and what we convey with our

faces and bodies (Giddens 2009). We use facial expressions and body language to verify that

the words spoken are true. As a matter of fact, a recent study from UCLA found that over

90% of communication is through body language (Heathfield n. a.; Laneri 2009). However,

we leave our bodies behind when we enter cyberspace (Lister et al 2003; Visions of 2010;

Shin & Kim 2009).

There are several ways to communicate online, one can for instance communicate through

on-line social networking sites (OSN), such as Facebook or mySpace (Back et al, 2010) or

participate in social interaction in the virtual worlds of the Multi-User Domains (MUDs) such

as Second Life (Turkle 1995; Poster 1995; Rheingold 2000). In MUDs the first thing the user

do is create a new characters, known as avatars, through strong identifying factors such as

name, gender and personal characteristics (Bruckman 1993; Rheingold 2000). Although

Giddens (2009) makes a case that our body is still connected to the self as it is sitting in front

of the computer screen, one could argue that when entering the virtual worlds of MUDs one’s

personality takes embodiment in the avatars. In real-life, one will assume different social

roles according to different social situations; a school teacher will for instance act differently

in the classroom than in a pub. However, these multiple selves will stem from one core-

identity (Gatson 2011; Giddens 2009; Turkle 1995; Visions of 2010). It is believed that

computer-mediated, text based communication leads individuals to lead parallel lives with

parallel identities (Gunkel 2010; Turkle 1995). In other words, when people are allowed to

recreate virtual identities of themselves in the MUD-avatars the anonymity of the internet

will tempt them to create online identities completely different from their offline identities

(Lister et al. 2003; Turkle 1995, Poster 2006).

On the other hand, recent studies show that the anonymity of the web has the opposite effect

than first thought. Being anonymous makes people feel safer and they are able to reflect their

true self more accurately (Back et al, 2010; Bargh, McKenna & Fitzsimon 2002; Boellstorff

2008; Visions of 2010; Yee et al. 2011). A study conducted by Back et al. (2010) on the use

of the popular OSN Facebook, showed that people are not using their profile’s to create an

idealized online identity. On the contrary, they conclude that OSNs “might be an efficient

medium for expressing and communicating real personality” (Back et al 2010, p 375). The

reason for this might be that OSNs like Facebook integrate various sources of personal

information, including facial images and social behaviour, traits that are known to give valid

information about personality (Back et al. 2010). Another study by Bargh, McKenna and

Fitzsimons (2002) regarding online communication came to the conclusion that due to its

anonymity, individuals were able to convey their true-self better and, as a result, form closer,

stronger relationships with the individuals they met online, than they would have during face-

to-face communication. In their conclusion they mention how this has to do with how

communication online is text-based, removing physical traits from the conversation.

When the physical embodiment, and the social constraints that comes with it, is removed

from communication, social interaction in virtual worlds has proven to lead to greater self-

confidence (Back et al. 2010; Barch, McKenna & Fitzsimons 2002; Boellstorff 2008;

Rheingold 1995; Visions of 2010). When communication moves from speech to text, the way

one interacts becomes less spontaneous. One individual participating in the Virtual World

Second Life concluded that when she had time to think about what she was saying, she was

able to speak more freely (Visions of 2010). Also, as the studies done by Back et al. (2010)

and Barch, McKenna and Fitzsimons (2002) have shown, she felt more like herself, when the

social pressure of body language and face-to-face communication was taken out of the

equation (Visions of 2010). As a matter of fact, several participants in Second Life have

come out saying that the confidence gained in the virtual world, has made them more

confident in the real world (Boellstorff 2008). One participant suddenly found himself being

able to talk to complete strangers while shopping, simply because he had done the same while

playing Second Life. Another, whom had been housebound for years, went out for coffee by

herself (Boellstorff 2008, p 121). These examples also goes against the early notion made by

Turkle (1995) that an identity created online functions separately from an individual’s offline

identity. On the contrary, it shows that online communication has become another social

realm to strengthen and develop one’s self.

While avatars plays a big role in self-representation online, Gatson (2011) makes the point

that there are several ways to represent one’s self online, and ones screen name and the text

that comes behind it, can be said to be “the face of the online self” (Whitty & Buchannan,

2010 quoted in Gatson 2010, p 225). Identities mark out differences and similarities in social

interaction. A big part of one’s personal identity that mark’s an individual’s difference is their

name, and when one is presented to a blank screen and asked to enter a name one is left with

the opportunity to construct a new self (Giddens 2009; Gatson 2011; Jaffe et al. 1995; Jones

1998). In an analysis of people’s online names in the online communication sites Bronzers,

Gatson (2011) looked at the correlation between people’ online representation and a range of

identity developing traits, amongst them gender. She found that through their online names,

Bronzers would often present authentic and nonanonymous aspects of themselves. Similar to

previous analysis by Jaffe et al. (1995) and Jones (1998), Gatson (2011) came to the

conclusion that although people keep their real names anonymous, with the use of nicknames

online, a lot of information about a person’s offline identity can be hidden in their online

name. Once again, proving the point that a person’s online identity correlates with their

offline identity. Gendered names, for instance, where common and matched the offline

gender identity in all but one case (Gatson 2011).

However, although Gatson’s (2011) findings confronts the view that computer-mediated

communication can be looked upon as interaction with no physical codes to locate gender,

race or class (Giddens 2009; Lister et al., 2003; Tucker 1995), gender is a highly discussed

topic when it comes to online identity. More than half of the female avatars in MUD games

are men in real life. As a matter of fact, portraying oneself as the opposite gender has now

become so common in MUDs that female characters have to prove that their offline self is

actually female (Rheingold 2000; Turkle 1995; Yee 2001; 2004). Turkle (1995) makes an

important point when she highlights that MUDs participants’ preoccupation with “fixing”

other participants gender, shows the importance of gender in the shaping of relationships.

Bruckman (1993) also highlights the importance of gender in human interaction, and argues

that this is one of the reasons gender-swapping has become so popular online.

In the real world, gender identity is strongly linked with embodiment, despite the fact that

one’s gender is also decided through “disembodied” factors such as linguistics and interaction

(Giddens 2009; Jaffe et al. 1995; Jones 1998, p 141). Rheingold (2000) argues that gender

swapping is made possible due to the technology and the anonymity of computer-mediated

communication. Just as Turkle (1995) he claims that the text-based communication online,

along with the fact that MUD participant can choose their avatar’s gender, simply makes it

easier for people to deceive. While both men and women swapping gender online have

claimed its out of wanting to experience how it is like to play the opposite gender (Boellstorff

2008; Jones 1998; Turkle 1995; Yee 2001; 2004) some also gender swap online to reflect

upon their real life identity, showing the importance of online media in the shaping of identity

(Buckman 1993; Boellstorff 2008).

In evaluating the role the media plays in the construction of identity one can conclude that

computer-mediated communication does have an impact on shaping an individual’s identity,

however, there are no such thing as virtual identities. As the main component in self-defining

lies in social interaction (Giddens 2009; Jones 1998), the internet has proven to provide new

forms of communication in the form of virtual realities. Nevertheless, while some theorists

believe that identity play in the MUD realms are creating individuals with parallel and

separate identities (Gunkel 2010; Turkle 1995; Poster n. a; Visions of 2010) recent research

have shown that people’s online identities (Back et al, 2010; Bargh, McKenna & Fitzsimon,

2002; Boellstoff 2008; Gatson 2011; Yee et al. 2011). This also proves the well-established

notion that people’s identities are fluent and multifaceted (Gatson 2011; Giddens 2009;

Turkle 1995; Visions of 2010). One exception to these recent studies, is the case of gender-

swapping where it seems that people’s curiosity precedes their honesty (Boellstorff 2008;

Bruckman 1993; Jones 1998; Turkle 1995; Yee 2001; 2004) Nevertheless, gender swapping

is an area that would be highly interesting to research more in connection to online media’s

influence on identity, maybe going a step further to see how many people ‘gender swap’ in

real life after playing it out online.