Download Bita Dadfar - Georgetown Commons

Dadfar 1
Bita Dadfar
CCTP 505
November 6, 2009
Exploring Virtual Camaraderie via An Interdisciplinary Lens
Introduction
We live in an age with a peculiar, alternate universe: cyberspace. While some
embrace the virtual platform, others fear it. One of the great intrigues behind this annexed
dimension is its innovative interface—its new meeting ground for people to connect and
interact in. Over the years, many organizations and communities have begun
implementing new communication technologies to explore the potential utility of
computerized communication. Correspondingly, there has been a heightened desire for
people to understand and assess the impact of communication technologies on
organizations. At a time when people are increasingly relying on computer-based
interactions, there is an exigency to determine its propriety and efficacy in particular
contexts. By partaking in Go Cross Campus, an on-line gaming activity organized by the
instructors of the CCT 505 class at Georgetown University, I was able to first-handedly
experience some of the challenges involved with adjusting to new virtual relationships
that form due to incorporating new media. Upon delving into the virtual gaming world of
Go Cross Campus, I developed a curiosity regarding cyberspace camaraderie’s that form
among players. Based on my ponderings, I have drafted up a research proposal for
approaching this virtual network puzzle.
Statement of the Problem
Dadfar 2
Through my experience in Go Cross Campus, I was inspired to focus on the issue
of trust among online team members. Online gaming tournaments and many online
communities are removing the need for physical acquaintances among members as
initiation and interaction occurs on a virtual platform, raising issues of trust among
virtual strangers.
Research Questions
I would like to study the overarching problem of trust in virtual communities by
posing the following investigative research questions:
• How can trust evolve between people who have never met in real life?
• How is team solidarity consolidated, let alone even formed, within an online gaming
community?
• How does increased use of various media channels affect the virtual relationship among
players?
Disciplinary Angles: The Utility of Incorporating Varying Disciplinary Lens
I would like to investigate the following prompts from two different disciplinary
angles: Communication Science, which prefers a quantitative research method; and NeoSociology/Cultural studies, which favors a more qualitative research method. I will later
address the added prefix in Sociology, which helps distinguish between the initial
disciplinary angle of Communication Science and the latter Sociology angle utilized in
my study.
Both disciplinary angles are vital in order to avoid what George Cheney calls the
“paradigmatic blindness” (Cheney 35) associated with using only one disciplinary
Dadfar 3
flashlight to illuminate a societal puzzle. As Cheney elaborates, a “research has a lot to
gain by directly addressing the complementary strengths and weaknesses of different
approaches to social investigation” (Cheney 38)—this is the virtue of interdisciplinarity.
By recognizing the differences in the ontological and epistemological perspectives
underlying particular disciplines, we can learn to appreciate the varied methods of
research advanced in each field. In essence, by analyzing this study through two different
lenses, one will be able to discern other focal points, which may not have come to focus
under a single lens.
For example, the scientific approach can provide empirical/quantitative proof to
the speculated correlation between increased media use and heightened sense of trust
among the active media users, which addresses the latter half of my research questions.
The sociological perspective, on the other hand, can illuminate crucial extraneous factors
that hinder the development of trust among virtual strangers (such as participants’
cultural background) that can only be detected via qualitative-based sociological
research.
In this manner, by approaching the research questions from two different
disciplines, we can gain a better understanding of how trust is developed or hindered
within a virtual community. Such inquisitions are worthy of research as they directly
address the exigency to analyze the burgeoning cyberspace camaraderie’s forming among
virtual networks today.
The Disciplinary Angle of Science
It should be noted that the scientific approach addressed here pertains to
communication science, the mode of study which was championed by the classic form of
Dadfar 4
sociology. Joe Moran elucidates on the origins of sociology in his book
Interdisciplinarity. Moran expounds, “Sociology was heavily reliant on American
theories and methodologies which were ‘militantly empiricist and quantitative’ because
of their origins in the positivist tradition” (Moran 61). Katherine I. Miller similarly
affirms, “Many scholars trace this adoption of positivist principles through the work of
classic sociologists” (Miller 51). Positivism is the belief that knowledge stems from
empirical-proven data and “formulated through the use of formal logic and embodied in
scientific laws” (Miller 50). Traditional sociology, thus, revolved primarily around
scientific methods of research, favoring quantitative data. In this way, I chose to utilize
the communication science angle in my study to provide the empirical vigor to my
speculations regarding increased media use and heightened sense of trust among virtual
teammates.
Applicable Theories and Methods to the Communication Science Approach:
The social network approach is a suited method to analyze the development of
trust within the Go Cross Campus teams. In “Studying Online Social Networks,” Laura
Garton, Caroline Haythornthwaite, and Barry Wellman divulge the usefulness of social
network approach for studying computer-mediated communication in virtual
communication. As explained by the authors, “this research approach has rapidly
developed in the past twenty years, principally in sociology and communication science”
(Garton, Haythornthwaite, Wellman 2). Upon establishing the suitability of the social
network approach, we can now turn our attention to the proposed method for my study.
The “whole network study” elaborated by Garton, Haythornthwaite, and Wellman
is a functional method for collecting data on the participant’s degree of trust among other
Dadfar 5
team players. As explicated by the authors in this article, “In a whole network study,
people are often given a roster of all the people in a specific group, and asked to identify
a connection of some specific content. Every person in the group is surveyed about every
other person which gives an overall snapshot of the structure of relations, revealing
disconnections as well as connections. This approach is particularly useful to identify the
relative positioning of members in a network as well as the partitioning of subgroups”
(Garton, Haythornthwaite, Wellman 12). In this fashion, I will similarly print out the
Blue team roster and distribute it among my fellow teammates who will then identify
specific connections. Additionally, I will ask each member to gauge the degree of trust
they have in each player by assigning a score next to each name—0 to 10. Zero
signifying “absolute no trust” to 10 representing whole-hearted trust in the teammate.
Preliminary Answers Based on Observation
As the “whole network study” suggests, I predict a subgroup within our team will
become more apparent. I believe the intra-group partition will be revealed based on a
discrepancy between the degrees of trust among blue team members in the CCT 505 class
versus the degree of trust projected onto the other blue team members who have been
recruited from outside the CCT 505 class. The discrepancy can be numerically
represented by computing the average of trust points given to fellow class members vs.
outside recruits. In order for this quantitative survey to work, the participants must
specify whether they are from the CCT 505 class or not.
The premise for my hypothesis stems from my personal experience as part of the
“insiders of the blue team.” I noticed that through the Go Cross Campus experience, our
recitation section grew much closer and amicable with one another. We began talking
Dadfar 6
about our shared angst and excitements regarding the game and began developing a sense
of team spirit, which extended beyond the classroom. Our section began wearing blue to
class together, going out to lunch together, and even adding each other on facebook—
ultimately confirming our friendships. I believe that the routine face-to-face interaction
that corresponded our virtual connectedness is what developed our sense of trust in one
another. Another applicable theory to this observation is the Media Richness Theory. As
addressed in Robert H. Lengel’s article, “Face-to-face is the richest medium because it
has the capacity for direct experience, multiple information cues, immediate feedback,
and personal focus” (Lengel 226). Conceivably, it was the lack of accessibility to the
richest medium (FtF) for the recruited members that diminished their capacity to be
trusted.
Alternately, the distanced trust between the insider blues and recruited blues could
be based on the lack of computer-mediated communication (CMC) between the two
subgroups in blue. As proposed by the hyperpersonal theory in “Computer-Mediated
Communication: Impersonal, Interpersonal, and Hyperpersonal Interaction” by Joseph B.
Walther, CMC can be hyperpersonal—exceeding FtF interpersonal communication
(Walther 5). To investigate this theory further in terms of my research, it would be
necessary to study particular exceptions where the degree of trust projected onto a
recruited blue member was high. Interesting cases to analyze would be Nancy Alamy
and Julie Espinosa’s ranked roster sheets, as these two were the blue team commanders
who engaged most extensively in computer-mediated communication with the outsider
blue members via facebook, email, and team chats. Such an analysis will answer my
Dadfar 7
research question regarding how increased use of various CMC media channels can affect
the virtual kinship among players.
An Alternative Disciplinary Angle: Neo-Sociology/Cultural Studies
As one can see, pursuing the quantitative research strategy to crack the virtual
camaraderie issue has prompted alternative ideas of factors which can affect team
solidarity and trust formations in virtual dimensions. An underlying question which
stirred by interest had to do with the role of an individuals’ cultural background.
The social network approach has focused on a rather structural analysis over
individualism as it “look[ed] beyond the specific attributes of individuals” (Garton,
Haythornthwaite, Wellman 4). I now turn my focus onto the more culturally sensitive
lens of neo-sociology, which allows me to address the more individualistic factors that
affect trust issues.
As elucidated by Joe Moran in Interdisciplinarity, “Cultural studies is simply
‘another generation of sociology’, one that recognizes that the complexity of postindustrial culture and society requires more than statistical, quantitative methods to make
sense of it” (Moran 64). This delineation should clarify why I chose to add the prefix to
neo-sociology— to clarify the difference between the classical view versus the new,
cultural-studies oriented form of sociology.
Applicable Theories and Methods to the Neo-Sociology Approach:
Methods which complement this disciplinary angle include “fieldwork-based
research, interviews, and ethnography: the direct observation of a social group over an
extended period” (Moran 61). Such re-orientation to qualitative research allows for a
Dadfar 8
more detailed collection of personal experiences of participants, which may reveal the
greater, subtler variables that affect trust formations, such as underlying cultural values of
participants.
Conducting interviews with each member of the blue team can provide a better
picture of what factors encouraged or disinclined members to pursue CMC with
particular members, unbeknownst of their “insider” or “outsider” blue status.
Furthermore, through the advocated method of participant observation, the
sociology/cultural studies angle will allow me to incorporate my ethnographic accounts
as a participatory member of the online gaming community, which spanned from October
6th to November 3rd of 2009.
Preliminary Answers Based on Observation
Based on my experience as a participant in Go Cross Campus, I realized that my
cultural background played a key role in determining my incompliance to trust, let alone
befriend, the virtual strangers on my team. By analyzing the personal journal entries
from my Go Cross Campus involvement, I detected a recurring reference I make to
“gēmu otakus” and my conviction to not turn into one. “Gēmu otaku” is a Japanese slang
term used to characterize those in Japan who are obsessed with games. The term is
usually directed towards those people in society who are unhealthily obsessed with online
games and socially awkward as a result. As an individual who was raised in Japan, I can
see how I have internalized the social taboo associated with online gamers who are
shunned by the strict, social-etiquette-enforcing public. In this way, I believe my cultural
norms and values have discouraged me from pursuing an in-depth, trust evolving, virtual
Dadfar 9
relationship with those who may fall under the “gēmu otaku” category back in my home
culture.
Through the cultural studies perspective, we see how the answer to “How can
trust evolve between people who have never met in real life” can hinge on an individuals
cultural background. As Baron writes in “Going mobile: Cell phones in context,” “Not
surprisingly, the answers to some of these questions vary with cultural—and economic—
circumstances” (Baron 130). The cultural perspective manifests how our socialized
norms can determine how we utilize media forms, which ultimately affect how we
engage with others on a gaming platform. Baron further elaborates, “The practices
through which we encounter these forms are only partially determined by the objects
themselves, with the rest of their functioning often shaped by the culture norms of the
society in which they are embedded” (Baron 131). Only through ethnographic studies
and in-depth qualitative research could we have acknowledged the culture-specific virtual
platform usage.
In order to fully assess the impact of cultural factors, I would have to conduct a
cross-cultural analysis where I interview participants of particular cultural backgrounds to
see if their values toward issues of virtual camaraderie match or not. Furthermore, I will
seek out fellow students who are from Japan, such as Naoko Nakamae, to see if she had
similar reservations towards virtual camaraderie based on the social tabooism regarding
gēmu otakus. It will be vital to verify that the Japanese students being selected for this
study are actually from Japan, as there are those who may be ethnically Japanese but
culturally raised in another country, in which case will possess varying cultural norms
that can affect the virtual trust formations in other ways.
Dadfar 10
In conclusion, by incorporating the neo sociological/cultural studies angle into
this study, we can venture out beyond the empirical data to identify other crucial factors
that can affect the participant’s will to pursue cyberspace camaraderie.
Conclusion
In this research proposal, I have laid out the two disciplinary angles in which I
wish to utilize to better tackle the greater societal issue involving virtual acquaintances.
The communication science discipline has emphasized the importance of progress and
scientific scrutiny in the study of social processes (Miller 51), while the neosociological/cultural studies perspective has emphasized the utility of qualitative research
focusing on individualistic factors that can interfere with virtual kinships. It should be
noted that the two disciplines work together to reveal the subtle factors which could not
have been pinpointed by the methodologies proposed by a single lens. As Moran
describes, interdisciplinary approaches “can challenge traditional, outmoded systems of
thought […] produce new, innovative theories and methodologies which open up the
existing disciplines to new perspectives” (Moran 182). By preparing the two different
disciplinary lenses, I hope to continue uncovering the extraneous factors which make or
break virtual trust networks within the alternative, peculiar realm of cyberspace.
Thoughts on my Unconference Experience
I must admit that I found the unconference to be rather ineffective. During the
first session, I attended the Hyperpersonal session which was overcrowded, causing a few
participants to be left out of the circle. It was difficult to commence on a discussion as
many people had different angles they wanted to start from. Although some interesting
experiences were shared, the connections were not made back to the topic of
hyperpersonal. The second session I attended the leadership session which was more
effective due to the smaller size of the group. I believe the greatest hinderance to
productivity was the overwhelming volume of voices coming from every direction of the
room, making it almost impossible to hear even the people in my group.
Dadfar 11
Works Cited
Baron, N. “Going mobile: Cell phones in context.” Always On: Language in an Online
and Mobile World. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.
Cheney, George. “Interpreting Interpretive Research: Toward Perspectivism without
Relativism.” Perspectives on Organizational Communication: Finding Common
Ground. Ed. Steven R. Corman and Marshall Scott Poole. New York: The
Guilford Press, 2000. 17-45.
Garton, Laura, Caroline Haythornthwaite, and Barry Wellman. “Studying Online Social
Networks.” Journal of Computer Mediated Communication 3.1 (1997): 1-30.
Lengel, Robert H., and Richard L. Daft. “The Selection of Communication Media as an
Executive Skill.” The Academy of Management Executive 2.3(1988): 225-232.
Miller, Katherine I. “Common Ground from the Post-Positivist Perspective: From ‘Straw
Person’ Argument to Collaborative Coexistence” Perspectives on Organizational
Communication: Finding Common Ground. Ed. Steven R. Corman and Marshall
Scott Poole. New York: The Guilford Press, 2000. 46-67.
Moran, Joe. Interdisciplinarity. New York: Routledge, 2002.
Walther, Joseph B. “Computer Mediated Communication: Impersonal, Interpersonal, and
Hyperpersonal Interaction.” Communication Research 23.3 (1996): 3-43.