Cyberethics for teachers, students, and the school community


Published on

Published in: Education
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Internet PsychologyEmpathyIdentityDigital CitizenshipLPs and Education
  • all methods through which people communicate electronically.Cyberethics are the ethical practices of Internet users, the right and wrong of online behaviors. The Internet Map is an interactive depiction of 350.000 websites from 196 countries, as they were in late 2011. The correlations calculated by Russian programmer RuslanEnikeev are more than 2 million, while placement, color and size have been determined based on visitation, connectivity and origin of the websites.
  • One way to capture the abstract nature of computing is to think of it as creating a kind of “tunnel vision.”
  • The abstract psychology of the Internet yields opportunities and challenges that come from these features of being online:
  • Internet psychology provides possible explanations of increases in cyberbullying and other online behavior.
  • Cyberethics education is addressiing . . .Click to add em 630 core virtuesToday’s focus on empathy
  • Given the reduction in social cues online, cyberspace can be called a more cognitive environment. This affects us in different ways. Many value aspects of the more cognitive and reflective environment in cyberspace. It can be more thoughtful. However, there appear to be trade-offs. As author Daniel Goleman put it: When interacting through technology, there is little tangible feedback. This impairs empathy, and, as Willard states, “undermines feelings of remorse”. . . making it “easier to rationalize an action.”
  • The head part is the idea of “walk a mile in my shoes.”
  • Empathic Concern (EC) measures people’s other-oriented feelings of sympathy for the misfortunes of others and, as such, is a more emotional component of empathy (e.g., “I often have tender, concerned feelings for people less fortunate than me”). Perspective Taking (PT) is a more cognitive or intellectual component, measuring people’s tendencies to imagine other people’s points of view (e.g., “I sometimes try to understand my friends better by imagining how things look from their perspective”). Konrath, S., O’Brien, E., & Hsing, C., (2011). Changes in Dispositional Empathy in American College Students Over Time: A Meta-Analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review 15(2) 180–198.
  • From 1979 to 1999, Konrath et al. found little change in the EC scores of college undergraduates. However, from 2000 to 2009 they report a 48% decline in EC and a 34% decline in PT. These are steep declines at both ends of the empathy spectrum.
  • As a result, we speculate that one likely contributor to declining empathy is the rising prominence of personal technology and media use in everyday life. (p. 188).Indeed, people today have a significantly lower number of close others to whom they can express their private thoughts and feelings (McPherson, Smith-Lovin, & Brashears, 2006). Alternatively, the ease and speed of such technology may lead people to become more readily frustrated or bored when things do not go as planned (e.g., O’Brien, Anastasio, & Bushman, 2010), resulting in less empathic interactions. Furthermore, people simply might not have time to reach out to others and express empathy in a world filled with rampant technology revolving around personal needs and self-expression.Fewer others with whom we are close and the conditioning of instant gratification through technology that can fuel frustration with time consuming personal relationships, “people simply might not have time to reach out to others and express empathy in a world filled with rampant technology revolving around personal needs and self-expression.” (p. 188).
  • Migration to phone computer.Other good url for social media use:
  • Is anyone here suffering from a lack of information?Is anyone working hard to keep up with the amount of information?Decline in EC and PT correlated to increase in personal ty use. Lets look at one piece of personal ty use that affects all of us: Identity.
  • Identity in cyberspace sounds like pigs in space
  • New relationships have an online dimension, that extends in cyberspace.
  • Have you been wondering if people make wildly different identities online?Conclusion but look at evidence.What I want to show you now is some findings from research on identity construction in different environments such as online dating, facebook, and virtual worlds using avatars. But first, overall look at id construction for adolescents.
  • On the Internet, the adolescent has space to verify his views and attitudes . . . and to thus embark on the long journey leading to its achievement”
  • as users wanted to avoid unpleasant surprises in subsequent offline meeting
  • Their research helps explain some of the nuances of identity construction online in Facebook and other venues.
  • Study of identity representation in avatars in three online settings, blogging, dating and gaming:
  • The accentuations with avatars appear similar to the “hoped-for selves” described on Facebook.
  • When given the option of choosing avatar attributes from either their own closet or fantasy options, they strongly tended to pick from their closets.
  • The actual self, in the physical world is typically restrained to gain acceptance or approval from important others for whom that acceptance or approval is conditional. (McKenna, 2007, p. 206).those “who feel least capable of meeting the expectations others have for them are more likely to hide their true selves in an attempt to elicit greater levels of approval” (p. 209).McKenna lists a variety of constraints or barriers on expression of the true self to function smoothly within a social context in the physical world. Among these are: role expectancies and constraints, conditional acceptance, social anxiety, and “the need for containment vs. the need for expression” (McKenna, 2007, p. 209).
  • McKenna suggests the
  • 1. automatically form impressions of others based upon physical appearance alone . . . we make assumptions that go beyond the information that is actually out there.”“The Internet may produce strong tendencies towards self-disclosure without the person being aware of or necessarily intending it” (p. 210).
  • 2. even those who reported being able to present and express the true self more online with strangers than they can with their face-to-face lives reported that they did not do so online with their face-to-face friends” (p. 214).
  • Hoped for and accentuated selves allow a little embellishment without being unrecognizable.As seen in work on Internet safety, those who get in trouble on the web are often the same people who have trouble in the physical world.(ISTTF, 2008)
  • I encountered the nothing-to-hide argument so frequently in news interviews, discussions, and the like that I decided to probe the issue. I asked the readers of my blog, Concurring Opinions, whether there are good responses to the nothing-to-hide argument. I received a torrent of comments:
  • Comments written in response to Solove article.
  • You will want to teach them the different parts of a letter, how to address an envelope, and how to mail a letter in a mailbox.Introduce Netiquette. What does Netiquette sound like? What do you think it means? In second grade keep it simple and stick to 2 rules: Rule 1: Remember the human and Rule 2: Adhere to the same standards of behavior online that you follow in real life (Shea)
  • Cyberethics for teachers, students, and the school community

    1. 1. Cyberethics for Teachers, Students, and the School Community David Whittier and Dana Susko School of Education Boston University10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 1
    2. 2. Cyber Ethics• Cyberspace - “extends across that immense region of electron states, microwaves, magnetic fields, light pulses and thought which sci-fi writer William Gibson named Cyberspace” (Barlow, 1990).Map from no-this-is-a-map-of-the-internet/• Ethics: – Rational examination of morality – Evaluation of people‟s behavior(Quinn, 2013)10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 2
    3. 3. Cyberspace Psychology10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 3
    4. 4. Cyberspace PsychologyAbstract Features:  Intangibility  The sense of Invisibility  The appearance of Anonymity  Reduction or Absence of Time Referents  More Control of time and pace of interactions  Geographic Transparency  Tunnel Vision10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 4
    5. 5. Internet Safety and Cyberbullying10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 5
    6. 6. Internet Safety and Cyberbullying• Addressing the problem from the bottom up. – What ethics do your students bring to their behavior online in particular and in cyberspace in general? – Respect – Responsibility – Honesty –Trust – Empathy10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 6
    7. 7. Thinking Empathy Abstracted from the physical world, cyberspace can be called a more cognitive environment “…a purely cognitive perspective slights the essential brain-to-brain social glue . . . and so excludes social talents that have been key to human survival.” (Goleman, 2006)10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 7
    8. 8. Empathy in Cyberspace?10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 8
    9. 9. The Heart Part – The Empathy heart helps us feel what others feel –the affective or feeling part of how we relate to others. The Head Part – helps us understand another‟s perspective through thinking about it - the cognitive or thinking part of how we relate to others.10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 9
    10. 10. Measuring Empathy• Empathic Concern (EC) – measures people‟s other-oriented feelings of sympathy for the misfortunes of others - a more emotional component of empathy• Perspective Taking (PT) – is a more cognitive or intellectual component, measuring people‟s tendencies to imagine other people‟s points of view. • Konrath, S., O‟Brien, E., &Hsing, C., (2011)10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 10
    11. 11. Declines EC and PT 1999 to 2009 120 100 1999 80 Measuring 60 2009 EC 2009 Empathy 40 PT 20 0 1999 2009• From 1979 to 1999,little change in the EC scores of college undergraduates.• From 2000 to 2009Konrath et al. report: – 48% decline in EC and – 34% decline in PT.10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 11
    12. 12. • Time spent social networking is up 82% from previous years as of 2009 (Whitney, 2010).• Cell phone use has risen dramatically: The average American teen now sends and receives around 1,500 text messages per month, and nearly all teens use their phones for functions other than talking, such as playing games and listening to music (Pew Research Center, 2009).• Such technology is easy and pervasive: More than 100 million people access Face- book with their cell phones (Media Literacy Clearinghouse, 2010)• More Americans now than ever before report using television and the Internet simultaneously (Nielsen, 2009).• 29.9% of television-owning households in the United States now contain at least four televisions• Television viewing recently reached an all-time high (Reisinger, 2010; Media Literacy Clearinghouse, 2010).10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 12
    13. 13. Visualizing Growth in Media Use• use.html10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 13
    14. 14. What are apps used for? Sept., 2011 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 14
    15. 15. • Average American is exposed to a 350% increase in total information outside of work compared to only 30 years ago (Bohn & Short, 2009).• As a result, we speculate that one likely contributor to declining empathy is the rising prominence of personal technology and media use in everyday life. (p. 188). Sara H. Konrath Research Center for Group Dynamics Institute for Social Research University of Michigan10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 15
    16. 16. Who‟s who in Cyberspace?• With so much time online and in cyberspace, we all must now negotiate our identity in cyberspace.10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 16
    17. 17. Online Identity“I can’t wait to see what you’re like online.”10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 17
    18. 18. Identity in CyberspaceResearch suggests that onlineidentities do not stray far fromidentities in the physical world.10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 18
    19. 19. Identity: Real and Virtual“Researchers confirmedrelationships betweenadolescents‟ real and virtualidentities. ”“ The adolescent‟s behavior inthe virtual environment usuallycorresponds with theadolescent‟s real identity to someextent, while allowingexperimentation. ” (Vybiral, Smahel, and Divinova, 2004, p. 176) 10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 19
    20. 20. Identity Dating Online“ People on Internet dating sites tended to „„stretch the truth a bit.” Despite„truth- stretching‟activities, identities produced on Internet dating sites were found to be quite ‘realistic and honest,’ (Ellison et al., 2006). ” (cited in Zhao et al., 2008, P. 1819) 10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 20
    21. 21. Facebook . . .“ Identity appeared to be highly socially desirable identities [that] individuals aspire to have offline but have not yet been able ” to achieve for one reason or another. (Zhao et al., 2008, P. 1830)10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 21
    22. 22. On Facebook• People do not create a fictional identity but rather “show” that part of their self they think is most socially acceptable. (Zhao, Grasmuck, & Martin, 2008)• „„True selves,” „„real selves,” and „„hoped-for possible selves” are products of different situations rather than characteristics of different individuals” (Zhao et al., 2008, p. 1831).10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 22
    23. 23. Identity using Avatars “For the most part, avatars in blogging were created to accurately reflect their owners‟ physical appearance, lifestyle and preferences” (Vasalou&Joinson, 2009)10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 23
    24. 24. “Avatar attributes drew on participants‟ self- image, and thus avatars were perceived by their owners as highly similar to themselves.” (Vasalou and Joinson, 2009, p. 510) Accentuations and “hoped-for selves”10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 24
    25. 25. Me and My Avatar“ Mostavatar. . . in having equal access to with their participants reported high similarity everyday artifacts and fantasy options, participants were inclined to draw on existing self-views rather than grasping the opportunity to explore other personas. ” (Vasalou and Joinson, p. 517)10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 25
    26. 26. Actual Self and the True Self• The actual self is the one most of us must present to the world to “fit in,” to function smoothly in the physical world.True self attributes were actually significantly less positive than those of the actual self (Bargh et al., 2002),” as cited in McKenna, 2007, p. 208). 10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 26
    27. 27. Who is the true self? The true self is identity aspects that an individual currently possesses, yet is generally unable to readily express to others in most situations, despite wishing to do so.10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 27
    28. 28. Studies demonstrate that peopleMake snap judgments when meeting people However, in person. • “Participant‟s true self was more accessible following an Internet interaction than following a face-to- face interaction” (McKenna, 2007,p. 213)10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 28
    29. 29. “Given that the true self becomesmore activated than the actual self after just five minutes of online interaction suggests that qualities of Internet communication very quickly bring out a person‟s true self” (McKenna, 2007). 10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 29
    30. 30. People tend to like one another more if they first become acquainted through the Internet than if they first meet in person” where “on the Internet” refers to a text- based, non photo, non-visual interaction. McKenna, 2007; Laboratory studies (Bargh et al., 2002; McKenna et al., 2002)10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 30
    31. 31. Conclusions? Identity: Real and Virtual• People‟s virtual identity does not appear to stray far from their physical world identity.• Ethics: How is honesty expressed in online identity?• In society: how is identity related to citizenship?10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 31
    32. 32. Citizenship to Digital CitizenshipTypes of Citizens• Dutiful• Engaged• Enlightened
    33. 33. Evolving Citizens• Broad, cross-national generational shift in postindustrial democracies from a DUTIFUL CITIZEN model to a ENGAGED (ACTUALIZING) CITIZEN model W. Lance Bennett"Changing Citizenship in the Digital Age" (2008)University of Washington, Seattle, Center for Communication and Civic Engagement
    34. 34. The Enlightened Citizen
    35. 35. Universal Declaration of Human Rights Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the General Assembly on December 10, 1948, states:“No one shall be subjected toarbitrary interference with hisprivacy, family, home orcorrespondence, nor to attacksupon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to theprotection of the law againstsuch interference or attacks”(United Nations, n. d.). EM-630 Cyberethics 35
    36. 36. Privacy Anyone?10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 36
    37. 37. • "So do you have curtains?" or "Can I see your credit-card bills for the last year?"• "I dont need to justify my position. You need to justify yours. Come back with a warrant."• I dont have anything to hide. But I dont have anything I feel like showing you, either.• If you have nothing to hide, then you dont have a life.• Show me yours and Ill show you mine. Its not about having anything to hide, its about things not being anyone elses business.• Joe Stalin would [have] loved it. Why should anyone have to say more?10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 37
    38. 38. Lesson Plans for CyberethicsLesson # 1 - Internet Laws Grade 5Lesson # 2 - Online Behaviors and Netiquette Grade 4Lesson # 3 - Privacy and Respect Grade 4Lesson # 4 - Plagiarism, Copyright, & Grade 8 (Writing)Intellectual Property Grades 10-11 (Chemistry)Lesson # 5 - Cyberbullying and Cyberethics Grades 9-12 (Algebra & Statistics) Grades 11-12 (English) Grades 7-8Lesson # 6 - What is Citizenship? Grades 9-12Lesson # 7 - How To Be A Good Citizen Grades 1-2 10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 38
    39. 39. Lesson Plans• Lesson #2 - Online Behaviors and NetiquetteGrade 2- Extend to E-mail• Introduce the postal mail delivery to your class• Letter writing developmentally appropriate• Students develop street name for classroom; assign a number for each student• Rotate postmaster weekly• Respect each other‟s mailbox• Remind students of writing friendly letters• Integrate into current curriculum
    40. 40. Lesson Plan IdeasLesson # 5 - Cyberbullying and CyberethicsGrades 11-12 - English and Shakespeares OthelloEssential Question: How does a play written 400 years ago relate to modern phenomena, including cyberethics and cyberbullying?Students will Understand: Unsavory emotions and unethical behaviors propel Othello‟s narrative action. Humans still experience these emotions and engage in these behaviors; technology increases their speed, power and danger.
    41. 41. Lesson Plan IdeasLesson # 5 - Cyberbullying and CyberethicsGrades 11-12 - English and Shakespeares Othello (cont.)Students will be able to: • Explain how Iago‟s unethical behavior parallels unethical behavior that is frequently seen in cyberspace today. • Utilize strategies to ensure that their behavior in cyberspace is ethical.
    42. 42. Where to go from here?• How do variables such as the psychology of the Internet, online privacy, identity, safety, and digital citizenship affect your school experience?10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 42
    43. 43. Thank You!• Please contact me if you are interested in participating in a grant and/or other research in cyberethics. David Whittier School of Education Boston University10/24/12 Cyberethics at MassCUE 2012 43