Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Assessing the available and accessible evidence: How personal reputations are determined and managed online

852 views

Published on

Slides for the conference paper 'Assessing the available and accessible evidence: How personal reputations are determined and managed online' presented at Information: interactions and impact 2015, Aberdeen, 23-26 June 2015.Abstract available at http://www.iidi.napier.ac.uk/c/publications/publicationid/13382473

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Assessing the available and accessible evidence: How personal reputations are determined and managed online

  1. 1. Assessing the available and accessible evidence: How personal reputations are determined and managed online by Frances VC Ryan Presentation delivered at the Information: Interactions and Impact (i³) Conference 24th June 2015, Aberdeen, Scotland Co-authors: Professor Hazel Hall, Alistair Lawson, and Peter Cruickshank f.ryan@napier.ac.uk | @cleverfrances | www.JustAPhD.com 1
  2. 2. Let’s chat about …  Overview  Domains of study  Key terms  Key themes  Evidence  The gaps  Research questions  Next steps 1 2
  3. 3. What’s it all about? How online information contributes to the building and assessment of personal reputations  How people manage their own personal reputations through their use of online information  The means by which people evaluate the personal reputations of others from the online evidence available to them – Personal reputation: Private individuals, rather than corporate identity and brand 1 2 3
  4. 4. Where’s the literature found? (Almost) Everywhere!  Information science  Computing  Employment research  Human-computer interaction  Human resources management  Information systems  Management and organisational studies  Marketing  Media and communication studies  Physical and mental health 1 2 3 4
  5. 5.  Created by the individual that the identity represents – and others  Different presentations of self for different audiences  “Representations of self/selves” that individuals create for or about themselves Key terms: Identity 1 2 3 4 5
  6. 6. Key terms: Reputation  Everyone has (at least) one!  Determined by others based on the information available to them  The personal opinions and character judgements one individual has for another 1 2 3 4 5 6
  7. 7. Key terms: “Real world”  Blurred lines  Intentional transfer of offline activities to online environments  Trading information for online conveniences  If you’re not online, are you real? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
  8. 8. Key themes in the literature  Information sharing  Information quality and accuracy  Employment and career opportunities  Friends and friends-of-friends  “Real names”, pseudonyms, and anonymity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
  9. 9. What does the literature tell us? Employers conduct social media reviews pre- and post- employment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
  10. 10. What does the literature tell us? Friends and friends-of- friends can impact reputation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
  11. 11. What does the literature tell us? “Real names” and anonymity are key debates 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
  12. 12. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 At least some self-regulation and censorship by individuals What does the literature tell us?
  13. 13. Mind the gap! (1)  To what extent are individuals evaluating the reputations of others based on the information found about them online?  What processes do individuals follow to identify and collect online information about others?  How is online information about individuals rated, assessed, or validated for the purposes of reputation evaluation?  To what extent does the quality of information collected impact the determination of individuals’ reputations? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
  14. 14. Mind the gap! (2)  How do individuals manage online information regarding their combined professional and private reputations?  How do individuals manage their online and offline reputations as one “real world” reputation?  To what extent do individuals feel more or less free or restricted because of the blurred lines between their online and offline worlds?  To what extent do individuals actively monitor their online footprints for the purpose of reputation management? If so, how and to what extent? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
  15. 15. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  How do people relate to, seek, and use information? (Bates, 1999, p. 6)  How do we handle ideas and knowledge, both our own and other people’s? (Howkins, 2009, p. 1) Alignment with some “big questions”
  16. 16. The research questions  How do individuals build identities for themselves online?  How do individuals use online information to build and manage their reputations?  How do individuals asses the identities and reputations of others based on the information available to them online?  To what extent are individuals actively practicing identity and reputation building and assessment online? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
  17. 17. Next steps  Pilot study being designed  Scope and test possible approaches for main study  Largely qualitative work  Preliminary results expected by end of summer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
  18. 18. Let’s chat about …  Sample for main study  Potential secondary methods of investigation  Other thoughts on the literature or doctoral investigation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
  19. 19. Indicative bibliography 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Ausloos, J. (2012). The “Right to be forgotten”: Worth remembering? Computer Law & Security Review, 28(2), 143–152. doi:10.1016/j.clsr.2012.01.006 Bates, M. J. (1999). The invisible substrate of information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(12), 1043–1050. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1999)50:12<1043::AID-ASI1>3.3.CO;2-O Cronin, B. & Askins, H.B. (2000). The web of knowledge: a festschrift in honor of Eugene Garfield. Medford, NJ: Information Today Duguay, S. (2014). “He has a way gayer Facebook than I do”: Investigating sexual identity disclosure and context collapse on a social networking site. New Media & Society, 1–17. doi:10.1177/1461444814549930 Fieseler, C., Meckel, M., & Ranzini, G. (2014). Professional personae: How organizational identification shapes online identity in the workplace. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 1–18. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12103 Finocchiaro, G. & Ricci, A. (2013). Quality of information, the right to oblivion, and digital reputation. In B. Custers, T. Calders, B. Schermer, & T. Zarsky (Eds.), Discrimination and Privacy in the Information Society (Vol. 3, pp. 289–299). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-30487-3 Greidanus, E. & Everall, R. D. (2010). Helper therapy in an online suicide prevention community. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 38(2), 191–204. doi:10.1080/03069881003600991 Howkins, J. (2009). Creative ecologies: Where thinking is a proper job. St Lucia, Queensland: University of Queensland Press. Kluemper, D. H. & Rosen, P. A. (2009). Future employment selection methods: Evaluating social networking web sites. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(6), 567–580. doi:10.1108/02683940910974134 Lingel, J. & boyd, d. (2013). “Keep it secret, keep it safe”: Information poverty, information norms, and stigma. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(5), 981–991. doi:10.1002/asi.22800 Madera, J. M. (2012). Using social networking websites as a selection tool: The role of selection process fairness and job pursuit intentions. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(4), 1276–1282. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.03.008 Mesch, G. S. & Beker, G. (2010). Are norms of disclosure of online and offline personal information associated with the disclosure of personal information online? Human Communication Research, 36(4), 570–592. doi:10.1111/j.1468- 2958.2010.01389.x
  20. 20. Ollier-Malaterre, A., Rothbard, N. P., & Berg, J. M. (2013). When worlds collide in cyberspace: How boundary work in online social networks impacts professional relationships. Academy of Management Review, 38(4), 645–669. doi:10.5465/amr.2011.0235 Savolainen, R. (2008). Everyday information practices: a social phenomenological perspective. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press. Uski, S. & Lampinen, A. (2014). Social norms and self-presentation on social network sites: Profile work in action. New Media & Society, 1–18. doi:10.1177/1461444814543164 Vaast, E. (2007). Playing with masks: Fragmentation and continuity in the presentation of self in an occupational online forum. Information Technology & People, 20(4), 334–351. doi:10.1108/09593840710839789 Van Dijck, J. (2013). “You have one identity”: Performing the self on Facebook and LinkedIn. Media, Culture & Society, 35(2), 199–215. doi:10.1177/0163443712468605 Copyright attributions Slides 2 & 18: Creative commons copyright Andy Wright (www.flickr.com/rightee) Slide 4: Creative commons copyright GotCredit (www.flickr.com/jakerust) Slide 5: Creative commons copyright (1) José Luís Agapito (www.flickr.com/blvesboy); (2) Red Rose Exile (www.flickr.com/redroseexile); (3) Stefano Mortellaro (www.flickr.com/fazen) Slide 6: Creative commons copyright (1) Martin Tews (www.flickr.com/airpark); (2) Sarah Reid (www.flickr.com/sarahreido) Slide 10: Creative commons copyright Horatio3K (www.flickr.com/horatio3k) All other images copyright Frances VC Ryan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Indicative bibliography (cont.)
  21. 21. Thank you! f.ryan@napier.ac.uk @cleverfrances www.JustAPhD.com Slides available at: www.slideshare.net/justfrances

×