Social Implications of Web 2.0

8/8/2019 Social Implications of Web 2.0

1/45

Social Implications ofWeb 2.0

Adam Clark

YIS MS and HS

Counsellor


2/45

About Me


3/45

What Are the

Issues?


4/45


5/45


6/45


7/45


8/45

5 Ppl =

10

Relationships

10 Ppl =

45

Relationships

15 Ppl =

105

Relationships

From Cla Shirk


9/45

Questions of

Privacy and Sociability

Formation and Maintenance ofRelationships

What it means to be human.

From Cyberpsychology, Human Relationshipsand Our Virtual Interiors. Teske, 2002


10/45


11/45

ChatWould you like some bread, Jerry?

No thank you. Im just not hungry

Well at least drink your beer.

Huh, twist off.

You have a little something on

your face.

I can get it.

No, no, you are missing it entirely.

Its an eyelash make a wish.

I dont want to.

Make a wish,

OK

It didnt come true.

Dont you just love lobster?


12/45


13/45

Addiction


14/45


15/45


16/45

Gaming


17/45

Internet Paradox (1998)

Reduction of Social Involvement andWell-being.

Reduction of Emotional Investment

Replace fuller relationships withweaker ties.

(Kraut et. Al, 1998)


18/45


19/45

Pathological gamers had more trouble in school,

played longer than the other children, were more

likely to have gaming systems in their rooms,

and were also more likely to be diagnosed with

ADD or ADHD.

The problem, and this is a frustrating one for

both parents and researchers, is that it's hard to

tell whether they're looking at a cause or effectwhen conducting a study such as this.

Study by Douglas Gentile, 2009


20/45

Family

SocialNetwork

Loneliness


21/45

Information vs. Communication

Messages vs. Interconnectedness


22/45

How does communication

technology effect our

development in a social

nexus?


23/45

Some Concerns

Less Self-Regulation

Emotional Reactivity

Reduced awareness of others


24/45

Plus those that dont fit in


25/45

Types of Bullying

Name Calling

Social Isolation

Cyber Bullying

Homophobic Bullying

Physical Bullying


26/45

In a survey by National Children's Homes

and Tesco mobile in 2005, 20% of

young people aged 11 to 19 years said

they had been bullied or received a

threat by e-mail, internet chat room or

text message.


27/45

Gating

Reduces importance of location.

Reduces importance of physicalappearance.

You can control timing and pace ofinteraction.


28/45

Social Theory One

Growing relationships require

increasingly meaningful

communication.


29/45

Social Theory Two

Online we are able to

present idealizedversions of ourselves.


30/45


31/45

Sharing

Conversation

Collaboration

Collective Action


32/45

Clay Shirky


33/45

Google Wave


34/45

the integrity of the self and

spirit are not givens but fragile

achievements

- John Teske


35/45

Embodiment


36/45

Role of

Risk


37/45

Are true intimacy and personal

integrity possible without the raw,

often painful, trials and errors ofself-disclosure and social

perception?


38/45

physical evolution


39/45

self evolution


40/45


41/45

How do we continue to play

our roles in the creation ofeach other?


42/45


43/45

References

Gentile, D. A. (2009). Pathological video game use among youth

8 to 18: A national study. Psychological Science.

Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyay,T., and Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox. a socialtechnology that reduces social involvement and psychological

well-being? Am Psychol,53

(9):1017-1031.

Teske, J. A. (2002). Cyberpsychology, human relationships, andour viritual interiors. Zygon, 37, 677-700.

Willoughby, T. (2008). A short-term longitudinal study of internetand computer game use by adolescent boys and girls:prevalence, frequency of use, and psychosocial factors.Developmental Psychology, 44, 195-204.


44/45

http://blogs.yis.ac.jp/clarka


45/45

Social Implications of Web 2.0

Documents

Transcript of Social Implications of Web 2.0