Never mind the technology, where’s the learning?

Online safety is a developing theme with lots of educational resources becoming increasingly available, but there are few resources for teachers to enable them to understand the psychology of cyberspace. Part of the craft of the teacher though is knowing enough about how humans react to a given environment so that they can teach their students how to cope in situations.

John Suler’s The Psychology of Cyberspace, although containing articles going back over ten years, is worth reading in this respect, and while the accompanying blog has not been updated that often or for some time, it’s worth trawling through his later thoughts on the subject.

One chapter, The Online Disinhibition Effect particularly captured my attention with regard to how teachers might apply knowledge of the psychology of cyberspace when discussing e-safety with students. In this chapter, Suler outlines six causes of disinhibition which act to explain why individuals might feel less inhibited and express themselves more openly online:

You Don’t Know Me (dissociative anonymity)
Here individuals don’t have to own their behaviour by acknowledging it within the full context of who they “really” are. The person doesn’t have to take responsibility for those actions. School is very much part of learning social interactions in the real world, so why not online?

You Can’t See Me (invisibility)
The opportunity to be physically invisible amplifies the disinhibition effect. You don’t have to worry about how you look or sound when you say (type) something and you don’t have to worry about how others look or sound when you say something. Suler explains this is similar in the real world to averting one’s eyes. The question, “would you say that to someone’s face” is one we often use when explaining how to consider our interactions with others.

See You Later (asynchronicity)
Not having to deal with someone’s immediate reaction can be disinhibiting. Sometimes this can be equivalent to an “emotional hit and run.” Considering how people might react to something again is about developing an ability to predict responses and empathise with others.

It’s All in My Head (solipsistic introjection)
This is about “hearing” the conversation in our heads and sub-vocalising what we read. Don’t we often do this with emails, mis-interpreting the nuance or tone in the voice and hearing what is said in our own way, and therefore reacting to it incorrectly?

It’s Just a Game (dissociative imagination)
In this scenario, people feel that one’s online persona, and your interactions with others are in a make-believe dimension separate and apart from the demands and responsibilities of the real world. They believe they can leave that game and their game-identity behind. This perhaps manifests itself in quite simple things like the information a student might reveal on a social networking site, or on their blog, so the illegal downloading of music when they would not steal a CD from a shop.

We’re Equals (minimizing authority)
The old cartoon, “on the internet nobody knows you’re a dog” can still be true today despite Web 2.0 and lack of control over your online dossier. However, this is all about how the ‘equality’ that the internet encourages makes one rash and, with the appearances of “authority” minimised, people are much more willing to speak out or even misbehave.

Image credit: Rob Gallop and Nuke Gingrich

Tags: psychology, cyberspace, John Suler, e-safety