For online data collection Robert V. Kozinet's Netnography (2010) must be the source as he is both the founder of the method and the first academic who published in online ethnography in 1996. On 2/11/13 1:00 AM, "air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org" <air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org> wrote:
Send Air-L mailing list submissions to air-l@listserv.aoir.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org
You can reach the person managing the list at air-l-owner@listserv.aoir.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Air-L digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. physical/digital worlds (Baker, Andrea) 2. Re: physical/digital worlds (Natalya Godbold) 3. Re: internet/flesh "realms" (Tom Boellstorff) 4. Re: physical/digital worlds (Charles Ess) 5. Re: physical/digital worlds (Mark C. Lashley) 6. Re: physical/digital worlds (Peter Gloviczki)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1 Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 18:54:27 -0500 From: "Baker, Andrea" <bakera@ohio.edu> To: "air-l@listserv.aoir.org" <air-l@listserv.aoir.org> Subject: [Air-L] physical/digital worlds Message-ID: <C9C537E8-1ED3-4524-899C-CB4BB2C4A9D9@ohio.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi, everyone,
Thanks so much for all your help, from those of you commenting both here in the list and off of it.
Yes, Barry, it was Nathan Jurgenson's work that first inspired me to carry on with my current project, sorry I didn't mention knowing about it. I also consulted with him initially, well before posting my inquiry. Nathan and PJ Rey are running their third Theorizing the Web conference, this year in NYC.
Of course, much work has dealt with the issue some, including mine on relationships, identities and communities, and thanks for your own important list of contributions, your references. Thankfully there is now such a wealth of writing and research available. However, some of us think we still have a way to go in, to use your words, "flesh"-ing out dimensions of the processes. There's really still much more to say about it at this time, imo. Most these days seem to not only accept that online/mobile/cmc interaction is real but that it is less discrete from other activities than many of us early internet researchers and private citizens had originally conceived, and experienced back then.
Anyone else who has specific references, please feel free to continue sending them to me and/or posting them.
Here are my original questions previously posted to the aoirlist. I'm hoping the formatting is better this time: "For a piece I'm preparing on interaction back and forth between online and offline or from digital to physical worlds and back, I'm looking for references about how that works for people, especially those who are members of online communities.
More than particular data to show this communication in process, although that is good too, I want to conceptualize themovement, the "flow" from one realm to another, to describe what is happening. Also, how does the online communication, including that through mobile phones, affect the offline interaction, and how do the offline encounters affect what goes on inside the online communities and in other social media containing some of the same people interacting offline. This project is part of my music fan research on fan communities, identities, and relationships. I'm already aware of the articles in the first issue of Mobile Media and Communication (January, 2013), and of Lauren Sessions-Goulet's excellent paper of a few years back on offline meetings and online communities, and have a few other helpful sources. I've done a body of work on romantic online relationships so I understand many of the dynamics there.
Please feel free to write off list or on. Thanks so much in advance! cheers, andee (andrea baker)"
thanks! --a
------------------------------
Message: 2 Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 11:33:02 +1100 From: Natalya Godbold <ngodbold@gmail.com> To: "Baker, Andrea" <bakera@ohio.edu>, air-l@aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] physical/digital worlds Message-ID: <CALu7UUaKP5M0gHs3VVCWVVuLvnCcXtb5F3o2TPtS85tsHwNdvw@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
You might find this useful? Orgad, S. (2009). Question Two: How can researchers make sense of the issues involved in collecting and interpreting online and offline data? Internet inquiry : conversations about method. A. N. Markham and N. K. Baym. Los Angeles, Sage Publications: 33-53.
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Baker, Andrea <bakera@ohio.edu> wrote:
Hi, everyone,
Thanks so much for all your help, from those of you commenting both here in the list and off of it.
Yes, Barry, it was Nathan Jurgenson's work that first inspired me to carry on with my current project, sorry I didn't mention knowing about it. I also consulted with him initially, well before posting my inquiry. Nathan and PJ Rey are running their third Theorizing the Web conference, this year in NYC.
Of course, much work has dealt with the issue some, including mine on relationships, identities and communities, and thanks for your own important list of contributions, your references. Thankfully there is now such a wealth of writing and research available. However, some of us think we still have a way to go in, to use your words, "flesh"-ing out dimensions of the processes. There's really still much more to say about it at this time, imo. Most these days seem to not only accept that online/mobile/cmc interaction is real but that it is less discrete from other activities than many of us early internet researchers and private citizens had originally conceived, and experienced back then.
Anyone else who has specific references, please feel free to continue sending them to me and/or posting them.
Here are my original questions previously posted to the aoirlist. I'm hoping the formatting is better this time: "For a piece I'm preparing on interaction back and forth between online and offline or from digital to physical worlds and back, I'm looking for references about how that works for people, especially those who are members of online communities.
More than particular data to show this communication in process, although that is good too, I want to conceptualize themovement, the "flow" from one realm to another, to describe what is happening. Also, how does the online communication, including that through mobile phones, affect the offline interaction, and how do the offline encounters affect what goes on inside the online communities and in other social media containing some of the same people interacting offline. This project is part of my music fan research on fan communities, identities, and relationships. I'm already aware of the articles in the first issue of Mobile Media and Communication (January, 2013), and of Lauren Sessions-Goulet's excellent paper of a few years back on offline meetings and online communities, and have a few other helpful sources. I've done a body of work on romantic online relationships so I understand many of the dynamics there.
Please feel free to write off list or on. Thanks so much in advance! cheers, andee (andrea baker)"
thanks! --a
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
-- Natalya Godbold PhD Candidate (Human Information Behaviour / Health Communication) Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences University of Technology, Sydney
Autonomous, Responsible, Alone (Interdisciplinary Press): https://www.interdisciplinarypress.net/online-store/medical-humanities/aut onomous-alone-responsible Social Information Research (Emerald) http://www.emeraldinsight.com/books.htm?issn=1876-0562&volume=5
?`~.. ?><((((?>?. .~??`~.. ?><((((?>?. .~??`~.. ?><((((?>?. .><((((?>`~.??.~??`~.?.~??`~...?><((((?> .,,.~??`~.. ?><((((?>?. .....,,.><((((?>`~.??.~??`~.?.~??`~...?><((((?> .~??`~.. ?><((((?>?. .,,.~??`~.. ?><((((?>?. .~??`~..
UTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of the University of Technology Sydney. Before opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects.
Think. Green. Do.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
------------------------------
Message: 3 Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 17:06:20 -0800 From: Tom Boellstorff <tboellst@uci.edu> To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] internet/flesh "realms" Message-ID: <070E9757-2E54-493B-92AC-662549A84576@uci.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
In terms of the internet/flesh "realms" issue - this is something I'm going to working on quite a bit I hope, and I discuss it in some detail in "Rethinking Digital Anthropology" (In Digital Anthropology. Heather A. Horst and Daniel Miller, editors. Pp. 39?60. London: Berg, 2012.)
For details, goto http://faculty.sites.uci.edu/boellstorff/publications/
On Feb 9, 2013, at 3:01 PM, air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org wrote:
Send Air-L mailing list submissions to air-l@listserv.aoir.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org
You can reach the person managing the list at air-l-owner@listserv.aoir.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Air-L digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. internet/flesh "realms" (Barry Wellman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1 Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 14:34:58 -0500 From: Barry Wellman <wellman@chass.utoronto.ca> To: aoir list <air-l@aoir.org> Subject: [Air-L] internet/flesh "realms" Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.4.64.1302091427571.28287808@origin.chass.utoronto.ca> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
There's been a lot written and researched on this already. But the issue keeps coming on. (I really wish scholarship were more cumulative.)
In addition to the items posted in the previous AoIR list, may I suggest
Nathan Jurgenson's theoretical essays on "digital dualism", such as
http://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2011/09/13/digital-dualism-and-the -fallacy-of-web-objectivity/
The Rainie-Wellman _Networked_ book, especially Part II
http://www.amazon.com/Networked-New-Social-Operating-System/dp/0262017199 /ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1325258020&sr=1-1
which itself picks up on writing I've done for 15 years, such as
"An Electronic Group is Virtually a Social Network" "Physical Place and Cyber Place: The Rise of Personalized Networking" ""Personal Relationships: On and Off the Internet" (with Jeff Boase) "Social Connectivity in America" with Hua (Helen) Wang
all get-able on my website http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman/publications/index.html
Enjoy, Barry Wellman _______________________________________________________________________
S.D. Clark Professor of Sociology, FRSC NetLab Director Department of Sociology 725 Spadina Avenue, Room 388 University of Toronto Toronto Canada M5S 2J4 twitter:@barrywellman http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman fax:+1-416-978-3963 NETWORKED:The New Social Operating System. Lee Rainie & Barry Wellman MIT Press http://amzn.to/zXZg39 Print $19; Kindle $16 Old/newCybertimes http://bit.ly/c8N9V8 It's still rock & roll to me
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
End of Air-L Digest, Vol 103, Issue 10 **************************************
tom boellstorff/professor/department of anthropology/university of california/irvine/website
------------------------------
Message: 4 Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 05:32:31 +0100 From: Charles Ess <charles.ess@gmail.com> To: "Baker, Andrea" <bakera@ohio.edu>, Air list <air-l@listserv.aoir.org> Subject: Re: [Air-L] physical/digital worlds Message-ID: <CD3CE16F.56F4E%charles.ess@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Hi Andrea and colleagues, Two sorts of quick suggestions -
1. In the direction of the history of the broader conceptualizations of the relationships/interactions you describe: A) partly by way of invoking both Barry Wellman's taxonomy of "the three ages of Internet Studies" and Heidi Campbell's similar taxonomy of three waves of research on religion online (both in Consalvo and Ess, The Handbook of Internet Studies, Blackwell, 2011), I developed an overview chapter on the history of the virtual/online // actual-real-material-"meatspace"/offline distinctions-relationships for our 2011 anthology: Self, Community, and Ethics in Digital Mediatized Worlds.? In C. Ess and M. Thorseth, eds., Trust and Virtual Worlds: Contemporary Perspectives, 3-30.? Oxford: Peter Lang, 2011. B) For a variety of reasons, AoIRists will likely want to also be aware generally of the now publicized results of the Onlife Initiative, a European Commission "Digital Futures" project - <https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/onlife-initiative>. Broadly, the project sought to move us conceptually further down the road regarding the basic assumptions that have undergirded most of our thinking, research, and policy-making in conjunction with, e.g., "the information society" over past several decades. As the phrase "onlife" is meant to suggest, the once hard (with the usual caveats) distinctions asserted between "the online" and "offline life" have been (largely) shifted towards strong interrelationality (a point that is now made in many, many ways, of course, but is also one of the characterizations of the third Age / Wave in Campbell and Wellman's taxonomies). In addition to what the Onlife Manifesto articulates in terms of developing new conceptual approaches towards what is characterized as a hyperconnected era, AoIRists may find some of the background papers that contributed to the development of the manifesto helpful as well: <https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/onlife-web-output>
2. In terms of more specific analyses, I find especially helpful A) Lomborg, Stine. Negotiating Privacy Through Phatic Communication: A Case Study of the Blogging Self. Philosophy and Technology 25 (2012):415?434. DOI 10.1007/s13347-011-0018-7. Stine draws on Simmel's understanding of the sociable self - i.e., as first used to theorize and describe "offline" sociabilities - to analyze interactions and negotiations online between a prominent blogger and her readers/respondents. This analysis I found to be particularly useful in a number of ways, beginning with the details Stine careful documents of the negotiations between those engaged with the blog, as these negotiations involve perspective-taking and phatic communication that work to both preserve individual privacy while simultaneously constructing and maintaining the shared personal space (in Danish and other Germanic language, the _intimsf?re_ - the "intimate sphere" of close(r/est) relationships) online. These details, among other things, show how such online processes are extremely similar to their offline counterparts - again, challenging especially 1990s' tendencies towards hard dualisms between the online and the offline. More broadly - though this may take you beyond your primary focus - Stine's work thereby provides an empirically-grounded analysis that fits with both other similar work in Internet Studies as well as in contemporary philosophy on identity and, most basically, conceptions/assumptions regarding selfhood - hence the article's inclusion in this special issue of the journal Philosophy and Technology, as dedicated to these matters. For the introduction: ?At the Intersections Between Internet Studies and Philosophy: ?Who Am I Online?? (Introduction to special issue), Philosophy & Technology: Volume 25, Issue 3: (September, 2012): 275-284. DOI 10.1007/s13347-012-0085-4.
(In these directions - of course, "the networked self" from Wellman and Haythornthwaite has worked prominently over the past decade, e.g., most recently in Julie Cohen's 2012 _Configuring the Networked Self: Law, Code, and the Play of Everyday Practice_. New Haven: Yale University Press. <http://www.juliecohen.com/page5.php>. At the same time, however, still more strongly relational notions of selfhood have been emerging in neurobiology (e.g., enactivism, the embodied mind, and other umbrella terms) and ethics (beginning with ecological ethics and feminist ethics / ethics of care - now with feminist concepts of "relational autonomy" and parallel notions of distributed epistemic and ethical responsibility). Such strongly relational emphases, most broadly, appear to have been characteristic of notions of selfhood in the pre-modern "West" and still typically function strongly in societies shaped by Confucian and Buddhist traditions, for example. What's of interest here regarding ethics is how such relational selves draw on virtue ethics: hence the importance of Shannon Vallor's work on virtue ethics vis-a-vis social networking - most recently, Social Networking and Ethics. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), forthcoming URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2012/entries/ethics-social-networki ng />. As well, the relational emphases in several Confucian and Buddhist societies appear to be shift towards more individual emphases, e.g., Hansen, Mette Halskov and Rune Svarverud (eds.). 2010. The Rise of the Individual in Modern Chinese Society, Copenhagen: Nordic Institute of Asian Studies.)
For my part, I find the "flow" you refer to helpfully analyzed especially from phenomenologically-informed frameworks (where such flow experiences are initially described in offline contexts) as well as, classically, in Cs?kszentmih?lyi et al. I know there's some work along these lines in Game Studies, for example, and, when I get a few more minutes, can cobble together a list of those references. In the meantime, someone(s) else on this list may have such a bibliography ready to hand?
In any event, hope some of this is of some use - and hope to hear more about your work at AoIR in Denver!
Best, - charles Associate Professor in Media Studies Department of Media and Communication
Director, Centre for Research on Media Innovations <http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/research/center/media-innovations/>
University of Oslo P.O. Box 1093 Blindern NO-0317 Oslo Norway email: charles.ess@media.uio.no
On 10.02.13 00:54, "Baker, Andrea" <bakera@ohio.edu> wrote:
Hi, everyone,
Thanks so much for all your help, from those of you commenting both here in the list and off of it.
Yes, Barry, it was Nathan Jurgenson's work that first inspired me to carry on with my current project, sorry I didn't mention knowing about it. I also consulted with him initially, well before posting my inquiry. Nathan and PJ Rey are running their third Theorizing the Web conference, this year in NYC.
Of course, much work has dealt with the issue some, including mine on relationships, identities and communities, and thanks for your own important list of contributions, your references. Thankfully there is now such a wealth of writing and research available. However, some of us think we still have a way to go in, to use your words, "flesh"-ing out dimensions of the processes. There's really still much more to say about it at this time, imo. Most these days seem to not only accept that online/mobile/cmc interaction is real but that it is less discrete from other activities than many of us early internet researchers and private citizens had originally conceived, and experienced back then.
Anyone else who has specific references, please feel free to continue sending them to me and/or posting them.
Here are my original questions previously posted to the aoirlist. I'm hoping the formatting is better this time: "For a piece I'm preparing on interaction back and forth between online and offline or from digital to physical worlds and back, I'm looking for references about how that works for people, especially those who are members of online communities.
More than particular data to show this communication in process, although that is good too, I want to conceptualize themovement, the "flow" from one realm to another, to describe what is happening. Also, how does the online communication, including that through mobile phones, affect the offline interaction, and how do the offline encounters affect what goes on inside the online communities and in other social media containing some of the same people interacting offline. This project is part of my music fan research on fan communities, identities, and relationships. I'm already aware of the articles in the first issue of Mobile Media and Communication (January, 2013), and of Lauren Sessions-Goulet's excellent paper of a few years back on offline meetings and online communities, and have a few other helpful sources. I've done a body of work on romantic online relationships so I understand many of the dynamics there.
Please feel free to write off list or on. Thanks so much in advance! cheers, andee (andrea baker)"
thanks! --a
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
------------------------------
Message: 5 Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 03:16:09 -0500 From: "Mark C. Lashley" <lashley.mark@gmail.com> To: Charles Ess <charles.ess@gmail.com> Cc: Air list <air-l@listserv.aoir.org>, "Baker, Andrea" <bakera@ohio.edu> Subject: Re: [Air-L] physical/digital worlds Message-ID: <DDD2503F-70B6-489A-9ED2-2CE9AECC9643@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mark C. Lashley Doctoral Candidate, Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication Graduate Assistant, George Foster Peabody Awards The University of Georgia Room 320, Journalism Building
Email | Twitter | Academia.edu | HuffPostTV
On Feb 9, 2013, at 11:32 PM, Charles Ess <charles.ess@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Andrea and colleagues, Two sorts of quick suggestions -
1. In the direction of the history of the broader conceptualizations of the relationships/interactions you describe: A) partly by way of invoking both Barry Wellman's taxonomy of "the three ages of Internet Studies" and Heidi Campbell's similar taxonomy of three waves of research on religion online (both in Consalvo and Ess, The Handbook of Internet Studies, Blackwell, 2011), I developed an overview chapter on the history of the virtual/online // actual-real-material-"meatspace"/offline distinctions-relationships for our 2011 anthology: Self, Community, and Ethics in Digital Mediatized Worlds. In C. Ess and M. Thorseth, eds., Trust and Virtual Worlds: Contemporary Perspectives, 3-30. Oxford: Peter Lang, 2011. B) For a variety of reasons, AoIRists will likely want to also be aware generally of the now publicized results of the Onlife Initiative, a European Commission "Digital Futures" project - <https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/onlife-initiative>. Broadly, the project sought to move us conceptually further down the road regarding the basic assumptions that have undergirded most of our thinking, research, and policy-making in conjunction with, e.g., "the information society" over past several decades. As the phrase "onlife" is meant to suggest, the once hard (with the usual caveats) distinctions asserted between "the online" and "offline life" have been (largely) shifted towards strong interrelationality (a point that is now made in many, many ways, of course, but is also one of the characterizations of the third Age / Wave in Campbell and Wellman's taxonomies). In addition to what the Onlife Manifesto articulates in terms of developing new conceptual approaches towards what is characterized as a hyperconnected era, AoIRists may find some of the background papers that contributed to the development of the manifesto helpful as well: <https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/onlife-web-output>
2. In terms of more specific analyses, I find especially helpful A) Lomborg, Stine. Negotiating Privacy Through Phatic Communication: A Case Study of the Blogging Self. Philosophy and Technology 25 (2012):415?434. DOI 10.1007/s13347-011-0018-7. Stine draws on Simmel's understanding of the sociable self - i.e., as first used to theorize and describe "offline" sociabilities - to analyze interactions and negotiations online between a prominent blogger and her readers/respondents. This analysis I found to be particularly useful in a number of ways, beginning with the details Stine careful documents of the negotiations between those engaged with the blog, as these negotiations involve perspective-taking and phatic communication that work to both preserve individual privacy while simultaneously constructing and maintaining the shared personal space (in Danish and other Germanic language, the _intimsf?re_ - the "intimate sphere" of close(r/est) relationships) online. These details, among other things, show how such online processes are extremely similar to their offline counterparts - again, challenging especially 1990s' tendencies towards hard dualisms between the online and the offline. More broadly - though this may take you beyond your primary focus - Stine's work thereby provides an empirically-grounded analysis that fits with both other similar work in Internet Studies as well as in contemporary philosophy on identity and, most basically, conceptions/assumptions regarding selfhood - hence the article's inclusion in this special issue of the journal Philosophy and Technology, as dedicated to these matters. For the introduction: ?At the Intersections Between Internet Studies and Philosophy: ?Who Am I Online?? (Introduction to special issue), Philosophy & Technology: Volume 25, Issue 3: (September, 2012): 275-284. DOI 10.1007/s13347-012-0085-4.
(In these directions - of course, "the networked self" from Wellman and Haythornthwaite has worked prominently over the past decade, e.g., most recently in Julie Cohen's 2012 _Configuring the Networked Self: Law, Code, and the Play of Everyday Practice_. New Haven: Yale University Press. <http://www.juliecohen.com/page5.php>. At the same time, however, still more strongly relational notions of selfhood have been emerging in neurobiology (e.g., enactivism, the embodied mind, and other umbrella terms) and ethics (beginning with ecological ethics and feminist ethics / ethics of care - now with feminist concepts of "relational autonomy" and parallel notions of distributed epistemic and ethical responsibility). Such strongly relational emphases, most broadly, appear to have been characteristic of notions of selfhood in the pre-modern "West" and still typically function strongly in societies shaped by Confucian and Buddhist traditions, for example. What's of interest here regarding ethics is how such relational selves draw on virtue ethics: hence the importance of Shannon Vallor's work on virtue ethics vis-a-vis social networking - most recently, Social Networking and Ethics. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), forthcoming URL =
<http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2012/entries/ethics-social-network ing />. As well, the relational emphases in several Confucian and Buddhist societies appear to be shift towards more individual emphases, e.g., Hansen, Mette Halskov and Rune Svarverud (eds.). 2010. The Rise of the Individual in Modern Chinese Society, Copenhagen: Nordic Institute of Asian Studies.)
For my part, I find the "flow" you refer to helpfully analyzed especially from phenomenologically-informed frameworks (where such flow experiences are initially described in offline contexts) as well as, classically, in Cs?kszentmih?lyi et al. I know there's some work along these lines in Game Studies, for example, and, when I get a few more minutes, can cobble together a list of those references. In the meantime, someone(s) else on this list may have such a bibliography ready to hand?
In any event, hope some of this is of some use - and hope to hear more about your work at AoIR in Denver!
Best, - charles Associate Professor in Media Studies Department of Media and Communication
Director, Centre for Research on Media Innovations <http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/research/center/media-innovations/>
University of Oslo P.O. Box 1093 Blindern NO-0317 Oslo Norway email: charles.ess@media.uio.no
On 10.02.13 00:54, "Baker, Andrea" <bakera@ohio.edu> wrote:
Hi, everyone,
Thanks so much for all your help, from those of you commenting both here in the list and off of it.
Yes, Barry, it was Nathan Jurgenson's work that first inspired me to carry on with my current project, sorry I didn't mention knowing about it. I also consulted with him initially, well before posting my inquiry. Nathan and PJ Rey are running their third Theorizing the Web conference, this year in NYC.
Of course, much work has dealt with the issue some, including mine on relationships, identities and communities, and thanks for your own important list of contributions, your references. Thankfully there is now such a wealth of writing and research available. However, some of us think we still have a way to go in, to use your words, "flesh"-ing out dimensions of the processes. There's really still much more to say about it at this time, imo. Most these days seem to not only accept that online/mobile/cmc interaction is real but that it is less discrete from other activities than many of us early internet researchers and private citizens had originally conceived, and experienced back then.
Anyone else who has specific references, please feel free to continue sending them to me and/or posting them.
Here are my original questions previously posted to the aoirlist. I'm hoping the formatting is better this time: "For a piece I'm preparing on interaction back and forth between online and offline or from digital to physical worlds and back, I'm looking for references about how that works for people, especially those who are members of online communities.
More than particular data to show this communication in process, although that is good too, I want to conceptualize themovement, the "flow" from one realm to another, to describe what is happening. Also, how does the online communication, including that through mobile phones, affect the offline interaction, and how do the offline encounters affect what goes on inside the online communities and in other social media containing some of the same people interacting offline. This project is part of my music fan research on fan communities, identities, and relationships. I'm already aware of the articles in the first issue of Mobile Media and Communication (January, 2013), and of Lauren Sessions-Goulet's excellent paper of a few years back on offline meetings and online communities, and have a few other helpful sources. I've done a body of work on romantic online relationships so I understand many of the dynamics there.
Please feel free to write off list or on. Thanks so much in advance! cheers, andee (andrea baker)"
thanks! --a
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
------------------------------
Message: 6 Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 10:29:31 -0600 From: Peter Gloviczki <glovi002@umn.edu> To: "Baker, Andrea" <bakera@ohio.edu> Cc: Air list <air-l@listserv.aoir.org> Subject: Re: [Air-L] physical/digital worlds Message-ID: <CAHhM1_ZP_smznfeY5qELQPk9aSHwGJoCrz-sr35i4dmzmUKN5Q@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Good morning, Andrea,
This is a great question. I like Turkle's book Life on the Screen and I think it might be of some use for you in regards to this issue. I also wanted to mention Licklider & Taylor's essay, The Computer as a Communication Device (1968), because I think it might be helpful in terms of the conceptualization questions that you raise in your note. It is linked here: <http://memex.org/licklider.pdf>.
Sincerely, Peter
Hi Andrea and colleagues, Two sorts of quick suggestions -
1. In the direction of the history of the broader conceptualizations of the relationships/interactions you describe: A) partly by way of invoking both Barry Wellman's taxonomy of "the three ages of Internet Studies" and Heidi Campbell's similar taxonomy of three waves of research on religion online (both in Consalvo and Ess, The Handbook of Internet Studies, Blackwell, 2011), I developed an overview chapter on the history of the virtual/online // actual-real-material-"meatspace"/offline distinctions-relationships for our 2011 anthology: Self, Community, and Ethics in Digital Mediatized Worlds. In C. Ess and M. Thorseth, eds., Trust and Virtual Worlds: Contemporary Perspectives, 3-30. Oxford: Peter Lang, 2011. B) For a variety of reasons, AoIRists will likely want to also be aware generally of the now publicized results of the Onlife Initiative, a European Commission "Digital Futures" project - <https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/onlife-initiative>. Broadly, the project sought to move us conceptually further down the road regarding the basic assumptions that have undergirded most of our thinking, research, and policy-making in conjunction with, e.g., "the information society" over past several decades. As the phrase "onlife" is meant to suggest, the once hard (with the usual caveats) distinctions asserted between "the online" and "offline life" have been (largely) shifted towards strong interrelationality (a point that is now made in many, many ways, of course, but is also one of the characterizations of the third Age / Wave in Campbell and Wellman's taxonomies). In addition to what the Onlife Manifesto articulates in terms of developing new conceptual approaches towards what is characterized as a hyperconnected era, AoIRists may find some of the background papers that contributed to the development of the manifesto helpful as well: <https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/onlife-web-output>
2. In terms of more specific analyses, I find especially helpful A) Lomborg, Stine. Negotiating Privacy Through Phatic Communication: A Case Study of the Blogging Self. Philosophy and Technology 25 (2012):415?434. DOI 10.1007/s13347-011-0018-7. Stine draws on Simmel's understanding of the sociable self - i.e., as first used to theorize and describe "offline" sociabilities - to analyze interactions and negotiations online between a prominent blogger and her readers/respondents. This analysis I found to be particularly useful in a number of ways, beginning with the details Stine careful documents of the negotiations between those engaged with the blog, as these negotiations involve perspective-taking and phatic communication that work to both preserve individual privacy while simultaneously constructing and maintaining the shared personal space (in Danish and other Germanic language, the _intimsf?re_ - the "intimate sphere" of close(r/est) relationships) online. These details, among other things, show how such online processes are extremely similar to their offline counterparts - again, challenging especially 1990s' tendencies towards hard dualisms between the online and the offline. More broadly - though this may take you beyond your primary focus - Stine's work thereby provides an empirically-grounded analysis that fits with both other similar work in Internet Studies as well as in contemporary philosophy on identity and, most basically, conceptions/assumptions regarding selfhood - hence the article's inclusion in this special issue of the journal Philosophy and Technology, as dedicated to these matters. For the introduction: ?At the Intersections Between Internet Studies and Philosophy: ?Who Am I Online?? (Introduction to special issue), Philosophy & Technology: Volume 25, Issue 3: (September, 2012): 275-284. DOI 10.1007/s13347-012-0085-4.
(In these directions - of course, "the networked self" from Wellman and Haythornthwaite has worked prominently over the past decade, e.g., most recently in Julie Cohen's 2012 _Configuring the Networked Self: Law, Code, and the Play of Everyday Practice_. New Haven: Yale University Press. <http://www.juliecohen.com/page5.php>. At the same time, however, still more strongly relational notions of selfhood have been emerging in neurobiology (e.g., enactivism, the embodied mind, and other umbrella terms) and ethics (beginning with ecological ethics and feminist ethics / ethics of care - now with feminist concepts of "relational autonomy" and parallel notions of distributed epistemic and ethical responsibility). Such strongly relational emphases, most broadly, appear to have been characteristic of notions of selfhood in the pre-modern "West" and still typically function strongly in societies shaped by Confucian and Buddhist traditions, for example. What's of interest here regarding ethics is how such relational selves draw on virtue ethics: hence the importance of Shannon Vallor's work on virtue ethics vis-a-vis social networking - most recently, Social Networking and Ethics. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), forthcoming URL =
<http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2012/entries/ethics-social-networ king />. As well, the relational emphases in several Confucian and Buddhist societies appear to be shift towards more individual emphases, e.g., Hansen, Mette Halskov and Rune Svarverud (eds.). 2010. The Rise of the Individual in Modern Chinese Society, Copenhagen: Nordic Institute of Asian Studies.)
For my part, I find the "flow" you refer to helpfully analyzed especially from phenomenologically-informed frameworks (where such flow experiences are initially described in offline contexts) as well as, classically, in Cs?kszentmih?lyi et al. I know there's some work along these lines in Game Studies, for example, and, when I get a few more minutes, can cobble together a list of those references. In the meantime, someone(s) else on this list may have such a bibliography ready to hand?
In any event, hope some of this is of some use - and hope to hear more about your work at AoIR in Denver!
Best, - charles Associate Professor in Media Studies Department of Media and Communication
Director, Centre for Research on Media Innovations <http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/research/center/media-innovations/>
University of Oslo P.O. Box 1093 Blindern NO-0317 Oslo Norway email: charles.ess@media.uio.no
On 10.02.13 00:54, "Baker, Andrea" <bakera@ohio.edu> wrote:
Hi, everyone,
Thanks so much for all your help, from those of you commenting both here in the list and off of it.
Yes, Barry, it was Nathan Jurgenson's work that first inspired me to carry on with my current project, sorry I didn't mention knowing about it. I also consulted with him initially, well before posting my inquiry. Nathan and PJ Rey are running their third Theorizing the Web conference, this year in NYC.
Of course, much work has dealt with the issue some, including mine on relationships, identities and communities, and thanks for your own important list of contributions, your references. Thankfully there is now such a wealth of writing and research available. However, some of us think we still have a way to go in, to use your words, "flesh"-ing out dimensions of the processes. There's really still much more to say about it at this time, imo. Most these days seem to not only accept that online/mobile/cmc interaction is real but that it is less discrete from other activities than many of us early internet researchers and private citizens had originally conceived, and experienced back then.
Anyone else who has specific references, please feel free to continue sending them to me and/or posting them.
Here are my original questions previously posted to the aoirlist. I'm hoping the formatting is better this time: "For a piece I'm preparing on interaction back and forth between online and offline or from digital to physical worlds and back, I'm looking for references about how that works for people, especially those who are members of online communities.
More than particular data to show this communication in process, although that is good too, I want to conceptualize themovement, the "flow" from one realm to another, to describe what is happening. Also, how does the online communication, including that through mobile phones, affect the offline interaction, and how do the offline encounters affect what goes on inside the online communities and in other social media containing some of the same people interacting offline. This project is part of my music fan research on fan communities, identities, and relationships. I'm already aware of the articles in the first issue of Mobile Media and Communication (January, 2013), and of Lauren Sessions-Goulet's excellent paper of a few years back on offline meetings and online communities, and have a few other helpful sources. I've done a body of work on romantic online relationships so I understand many of the dynamics there.
Please feel free to write off list or on. Thanks so much in advance! cheers, andee (andrea baker)"
thanks! --a
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
-- Peter Joseph Gloviczki, Ph.D. http://petergloviczki.com
------------------------------
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
End of Air-L Digest, Vol 103, Issue 11 **************************************