GEC 1 – Understanding the Self

Lesson 9: Digital Self

Introduction
These days, more people are becoming active in using the internet for research,
pleasure, business, communication, and other purposes. Indeed, the internet is great help for
everyone. On the other hand, people assumes different identities while in the cyberspace.
People act differently when they are online and offline. We have our real identify and online
identity (Alata, et. al, 2018).
The term online identity implies that there is distinction between how people present
themselves online and how they do offline. But any split between online and offline identity is
narrowing, for two reasons, Firstly in contrast to Internet of the 1990s, people today use social
media, primarily to communicate with people they know in real life contexts like home, work, and
school. Secondly, wireless networking and portable devices like smartphones and tablets make
it easy to access social media as part of day-today life, rather than having to formally log on to
the internet (Marwick, 2013).
Nowadays, we are living in a digital age, wherein we interact with people involving
technology –cellular phones, computers and other gadgets, thus building our DIGITAL SELF.
What is your Digital self? How do you represent yourself online? Through his module, you will
understand how online identity is established based on the information you offer in technology-
interactions.
Likewise, this will present the risk and dangers in posting too much of your personal life
or pretending you are somebody else in the social media world. This module will also present
what you can do to protect your online personality that can affect your online personality.

Lesson proper

Online Identity and Self in Cyberspace: (I, Me, Myself, and My User ID Online Identity)
Online identity is the sum of your characteristics and interactions. Because you interact
differently with each website you visit, each of those websites will have different picture of who
you are and what you do. Sometimes the different representations of you are referred to as
partial identities, because one of them has the full and true picture of who you are.
Your online identity is not the same as your real-world identity because the
characteristics you represent online differ from the characteristics you represent in the physical
world. Every website you interact with has its own idea of your identity because each one you
visit sees you and your characteristics differently (InternetSociety.org, 2011).
Online, most research on identity focused on self-presentation (Boyd, 2010; Wynn &
Katz, 1997; Papacharissi, 2002; Baym, 2010). Social media lie social network sites, blogs, and
online personals require users to self-consciously create virtual deceptions of themselves. One
way of understanding such self-representation is the information and materials people choose to
show others on a Facebook profile or Twitter stream. But identity is also expressed through
interacting with others, whether over instant messenger or email.
Since there are fewer identity cues available online than face-to-face, every piece of
digital information a person provides, from typing speed to nickname and email address, can
and is used to make inferences about them (Marwick, 2013).
How do you build your online identity? Every website that you interact with will collect
its own version of who you are, based on the information that you have shared. Thus, it is up to
you how you will represent yourself as closely as who you are and what you do in real life or
selectively, to create a representation far from your real life.

Selective Self-presentation and Impression Management

These are characteristics showing behaviors designed to convey an image about
ourselves to other people and to influence the perception of other people of this image. This
explains why our behaviors can change if we notice that we are being watched or observed.
This self-presentation can also change depending on who we are interacting with or what
personal information we need to be providing to present ourselves in a way that will be
acceptable to others. Thus, we can select only what we want to present and impress to others,
what we view beneficial to our personality, especially when we create a Digital self. We
carefully choose representation or expression of one’s real world to the online world.

Insert Comic illustration…..on page 136 c/o Villafuerte.

Impact of Online Interactions on the Self

With interacting with other people, we automatically make inferences about them without
even being consciously aware of it. We cannot help but ponder what they are thinking about,
what their facial expressions mean, what their intentions are, and so on. This predisposition is
what makes social interactions so demanding. This suggests that interaction with human
partners requires more emotional involvement, and thus more cognitive effort, than interacting
through a computer. The conclusion is clear - online interaction does not require cognitive or
emotional involvement, making our interaction with it much easier (Rilling, Sanfrey, Aronson,
Nystrom, & Cohen, 2004).
Is it true that Facebook provides opportunities for increased identity
development? YES. Research suggests that young users report increased self-esteem and
general wellbeing following instances of positive feedback on social networking sites
(Valkenburg, Peter, & Schouten, 2006). Relatively, results from a 2009 survey of college
students indicated that the heaviest Facebook users were also most satisfied with their lives and
exhibited greater social and political engagement (Valenzuela, Park, & Kee, 2009).
 However, online interactions cannot reveal our true feelings and can decrease
people’s happiness levels. The extra effort involved in face-to-face interactions can be spared
in online interactions that are founded on minimal or constrained social cues; most of these
signals can be summed up in emoticons and punctuation. Hence, it is easier to hide our
emotions behind an email, a Facebook post or a tweet. Studies were conducted to show that
within the first two years after people first accessed the internet, their happiness level decreased
(Kraut, 1998) and that social media has a small, yet significant detriment on overall well-being.
This is because browsing social media sites alone can lead to feelings of jealousy when we
compare self to the online personal of others.
We can control our self-presentations on online interactions and this may be both
beneficial and harmful to the individual. Compared with face-to-face presentation online
interactions enable us to self-censor to a greater extent and manage our online identities more
strategically which provides greater opportunity to misrepresent ourselves.
This is due to asynchronous communication (time-delayed interaction that does not
require participants to be online simultaneously).
Positive Impact of Social Media and Online Interaction on the Self.
1. Social media sites inform and empower individuals to change themselves and their
communities
2. Increased self-esteem when receiving many likes ad shares.
3. Boost one’s moral and feelings of self-worth (Toma, 2010 Social Media & Identity,
2013)
Negative Impact of Social Media and Online Interaction on the Self.
1. Extensive online engagement is correlated with personality and brain disorders like
poor social skills. ADHD, narcissistic tendencies, a need for instant gratification, and addictive
behaviors and other emotional distress like depression, anxiety, and loneliness.
2. Low self-esteem due to the risk of being exposed to cyberbullying and cyber
pornography (healthxph.net-2015).
3. More occupied in giving attention to social media than in keeping their customs and
practices (phblogspot 2013).

Extended Self in a Digital World – Russel W. Belk.

A glimpse on the ideas of Russel W. Belk on his “Extended Self in a Digital World” could
give more light on the topic. Belk presents five changes emerging from our current digital age:
1. Dematerialization. Things are disappearing right before our eyes – our information,
Communications, photos, videos music, calculations, messages, “written” words are now largely
invisible and immaterial, composed of electronic streams stored in digital storage devices on
locations we will never know. The question is; can we gain status or an enhanced sense of self
from virtual possessions?” Belk proposes four functions of virtual consumption;

a. stimulates consumer desire for both material and virtual goods

 b. actualizes possible daydreams such as those of wealth and status by enacting them
in video games
c. actualizes impossible fantasies such as being a magician or space pirate with
magical objects
d. facilitates experimentation such as being a criminal in a video game. Reports show
that virtual goods are now some of the most valued commodities for cybercriminals
who attempt to hack into games and steal virtual possessions to resell. Suicide may
also result a stolen virtual or digital possession.

2. Re-embodiment. This is characterized as the breakout f the visual online, leading to

new “constructions” and definitions of the self in the virtual world where online games blogs,
web pages, photo and video-sharing sites, internet dating sites are possible; we are
disembodied and re-embodied as avatars, sharing identity with the chosen avatar virtually.
Online, the plain represent themselves as glamorous, the old as young, and the young as older.
Those of modest means wear elaborate jewelry, in virtual space, the crippled walk without
crutches, etc. We may employ anonymous and pseudonymous identities online and enact wild
fantasy identities in online games and virtual words. In some cases, even virtual sex, marriage,
and divorce are made possible. Virtual participants may also have multiple characters,
increasing one’s anonymity.

3. Sharing. Uploading, downloading, sharing, etc. provide free access to information

through web surfing. How does sharing of possessions online enhance our individual and
aggregate sense of self?

In Facebook, social media friends know more than the immediate families about our
daily activities, connections, and thoughts. Diaries that were once private shared only with close
friends are now posted as blogs for everyone to read. There is loss of control due to sharing –
uncontrolled sharing of information by online participants or friends; restrictions are not
observed.

4. Co-construction of Self
Our digital involvement is social in nature. Our blogs invite comments, social interaction
which help construct our individual and joint extended self of self as the new version of Cooley’s
“looking Glass Self theory” known as collaborative self. What are the effects of this? Seeking
affirmation is obviously identified. Friends also help to co-construct and reaffirm each other’s
sense of self through the postings, tagging and comments.
4. Distributed Memory. In a digital world, there is a new set of devices and
technologies for recording and archiving our memories. The dilemma is seen in the
narrative of the self. Our identity is not to be found in behavior nor in the reaction of
others, but the capacity to keep a particular study about the self. Photos posted in
the online world may not be accurate in giving memories of the past since the
photos, blogs, etc. may just be selected representations of happy times hence, may
not be sufficient to tell the stories.
 Here is the summary of changes in digital self. With the proliferation of multiple
online personas, the sore of the self idea crumbles in the digital world, the self is now
extended into avatars, which can affect our offline behavior and our sense of self,
from a ore private to public presentation of self which is now co-constructed that an
help affirm or modify our sense of self. It is highly recommended that we set
boundaries to our online self.

Boundaries of the Online Self: Private vs. Public; Personal vs. Social identity Online;
Gender and Sexuality Online.

Setting Boundaries to your Online Self:

. Stick to safer sites

. Guard your passwords
. Be choosy about your online friends
. Remember that anything you put online or post on a site is there forever, even if
you try to delete it.
. Don’t be mean or embarrass other people online
. Limit what you share.

Adolescents’ online interactions are both a literal and a metaphoric screen for
representing major adolescent development issues, such as sexuality and identity.
Because of the public nature of internet chat rooms, they provide an open window
into the expression of adolescent concerns (Subrahmanyam, Greenfield & Tynes,
2004).

Research states that there are more gender-related similarities in establishing an online
self and a blog use (Huffaker, 2004) and that the online self is a good venue for gender
expression and sexuality. This is because in one’s online identity, there is no physical
embodiment of gender or other physical markers of identity (Subrahmanyam, et al., 2004) and
the online interactions serve as an agency for negotiating and expressing sexuality
(Boonmongkon, et.al. 2013).Age and sex are primary categories to which people are assigned
(Brewer & Lui 1989) but in online identity, these are not evident and non-explicit. Interactions
online are important sources of sexual information for teens (Borzekowski & Ricket, 2001; Ward,
2004). Yet, extra care with full sense of accountability must be observed in the use of the social
media to protect the self.
References
Alata, et. al. (2018). Understanding the self. First edition. Rex Book Store, Manila, Philippines.
Huffaker, D. (2004). Gender similarities and differences in online identity and language
use among teenage bloggers.

Marwick, A. (2013). “Online identity.” In Hartley, J., Burgess, J. & Bruns, a. (eds), Companion to
New Media Dynamics. Blackwell Companions to Cultural Studies. Malden, MA:
Blackwell, pp. 355-364

Subrahmanyam, K. Greenfield, B. & Tynes, B. (2004). Constructing sexuality and identity in an

online teen chat room. Applied Developmental Psychology 25, 651 – 666.

Villafuerte, et.al (2018). Understanding the self. Nieme Publishing House Co. Ltd, Quezon City,
Philippines.