How online intimacies affect our impression management, thus changing the way our self worth is measured online versus offline.

1. By Erin Dzioba

2. • Technology, specifically social
media platforms, can indeed
create a sense of solidarity and
togetherness.
• For example, teens have
reported that they feel
increased social support
through the use of Facebook
networking.
[4]

3. With so much sharing of our day to
day lives online, there is an impact that
Facebook (and other media) has on
romantic cultures in which there are
new sets of obstacles, awkward
conversations, and unclear situations.
[4]

4. • Carpenter (2013) reported
that couples who post more
on Facebook about their
relationship feel more secure
about their relationship in
general. He concluded that
less interaction online leads
to less interaction offline.
[10]

5. The previous statement is one-sided and must be countered with
further explanation…
• The new norms that are
created with online
intimacies are in
combination with offline
relationships.
• Most of our lives have
become a combination of
online and offline, which
causes people to have
multiple conversations at
the same time.

6. • The combination of online
and offline conversations is
a phenomenon known as
multi-communication. [4]
• This is sometimes also
known as phubbing,
whereby an individual
multi-communicates in
person and online at the
same time. [5]

7. • It is evident that we now live
in a time where no one gets
attention for a long period of
time, partly because of multi-
communication.
• This can create a few
problems relating to
, ,
and
…

8. • The continual broadcasting
of our daily lives to each
other creates ambient
intimacies in which we
experience an unfocused
closeness that we maintain
by following each other.
[4]

9. Continuous partial attention
forces people to constantly look
for the best version of something
in effort to not miss out on
anything (also known as fear of
missing out). [8]

10. Our self
worth is now
contingent on
public
approval and
opinion as we
use
technology to
define
ourselves by
sharing our
thoughts and
feelings we
are
experiencing
in a specific
moment.
[4]

11. Turkle (2012) explains that “people are
comforted by being in touch with a lot
of people - carefully kept at bay. We
can't get enough of one another if we
can use technology to keep one
another at distances we can control:
not too close, not too far, just right. I
think of it as a Goldilocks effect.” [9]

12. I want to have a
feeling; I need
to send a text.
I have a
feeling; I want
to make a call.

13. Through these
platforms we
construct our social
selves online where
we alter, update,
and tweak our self
portraits according
to the responses we
receive online from
viewers. [4]

14. Managing online impressions
has now become a 24/7 job,
with self expression and self
construction becoming a kind of
online visual diary that shows
proof to our viewers that ‘we
were here’. [4]

15. Goffman was a sociologist who believed that we use feedback
we receive from others around us to help establish
expectations of our own behaviour. [3]
He coined the term impression management which refers to ways
individuals seek to control the impressions they convey to
other people. [3]

16. • Goffman argued that we are
driven to maintain positive
impressions because
outcomes of interactions
serve as a source of self
esteem. [6]
• By controlling the way that
other people see us we build
and maintain self esteem.
[6]
• Postmodern theorists argue
that the self has become
saturated in recent years
because we have so many
others with whom we
interact. [6]

17. • The saturation we are enduring is known as multiphrenia where
we have an inability to know who we really are because we are
playing so many roles at once and have so many others from
whom we receive different feedback. [6]

18. • Zurcher (1982) studied emotional performances using elements of
impression management and found that people follow emotional
scripts (expectations about when and how to display certain
emotions) and emotional cues (information about when and what
emotions are appropriate in a given social setting). [7]
• Bresciani and Schmeil (2012) explains the problem with learning
norms online as “Social media are pervasive, free, and have the
potential to create disproportionate effects compared to the initial
investment, through the networking and ripple effect they create
for their very nature of many-to-many communication.” [2]

20. • If we use our online selves to
maintain our impression
management, the multiphrenia
crisis that we are experiencing
will affect how we learn
emotional cues and emotional
scripts as they are presented very
differently online than offline.
• Anderssen (2014) explains that
anxiety has risen with online
users because “the convenience of
staying connected has become a
stress-inducing burden”. [1]

21. Anderssen explains this
process as screen apnea
where people “hold their
breath when doing
something online because
of the underlying chronic
vigilance and always being
on edge”. [1]
The resulting anxiety we experience
proves how we are too reliant on
managing our self worth and
impressions off of online feedback.

22. Our inability to know exactly who we
are because we are playing so many
roles can result in existential crises,
anxiety, depression, and the like. We
must learn how to balance these roles
of identities or we else will know
nothing and question our existence!

23. [1] Anderssen, E. (2014, Mar 29). CRUSHED. The
Globe and Mail Retrieved from
https://search-proquest-com.proxy.queensu.ca/
docview/1511086003?accountid=6180
[2] Bresciani, S., & Schmeil, A. (2012). Social Media
Platforms for Social Good. Campione d’Iitalia: 2012
6th IEEE International Conference on Digital
Ecosystems and Technolgoies (DEST).
[3] Carver, L. (2017). Self and Identity. Personal
Collection of L. Carver, Queen’s University, Kingston,
ON.
[4] Matrix, S. (2017). Online Friends. Personal
Collection of S. Matrix, Queen’s University, Kingston,
ON.
[5] Matrix, S. (2017). Mobile Technologies. Personal
Collection of S. Matrix, Queen’s University, Kingston,
ON.
[6] Rohall, D. E., Milkie, M. A., & Lucas, J. W. (2014). Chapter 5:
Self and Identity. In D. E. Rohall, M. A. Milkie, & J. W. Lucas,
Social Psychology: Sociological Perspectives. (Third Edition ed.). New
York: Pearson.
[7] Rohall, D. E., Milkie, M. A., & Lucas, J. W. (2014). Chapter 10:
The Sociology of Emotions and Relationships. In D. E. Rohall, M.
A. Milkie, & J. W. Lucas, Social Psychology: Sociological Perspectives.
(Third Edition ed.). New York: Pearson.
[8] Stone, Linda. (2016). Continuous Partial Attention. Retrieved June
1, 2017, from Linda Stone:
https://lindastone.net/qa/continuous-partial-attention/
[9] Turkle, S. (2012, April 22). The flight from conversation. New
York Times, p. 1(L). Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com.proxy.queensu.ca/ps/i.do?id=GALE
%7CA287213303&v=2.1&u=queensulaw&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w
&asid=9e22389507adacd60cce5aabfd6d7991
[10] Western Illinois University. (2013, April 23). Facebook and
romantic relationships. ScienceDaily. Retrieved May 30, 2017 from
www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130423110713.htm
Note: All images are retrieved from www.pexels.com and
www.unsplash.com and are licensed under the Creative Commons
Zero license.