This document discusses social capital and the impact of the Internet on social relationships. It presents Robert Putnam's research on the decline of social capital in America. It also examines three views on how the Internet affects social capital: that it increases social capital, decreases social capital, or adds to social capital without decreasing existing relationships. The document uses studies and data to argue that email adds to both local and long-distance contact rather than replacing other forms of communication.

1. the social impact of
Anabel Quan-Haase
Sociology
Information and Media Studies
The University of Western Ontario
playing the gallery, are you game?
London, ON Oct. 3 to 5, 2007
The University of Western Ontario

2. Social Capital in America
• Harvard sociologist
Robert D. Putnam has
document in America a
decline in social capital:
– Network capital
– Participatory capital
– Sense of community

3. Socializing with Neighbors
70
63 60
60 57 55
50 51
Percentage
40
30
20
10
0
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995

4. Informal Socializing
70
63 60
60
Minutes per Diary Day
52
50
40 39
30
20
10
0
1965 1975 1985 1995

5. Debating Internet Effects
• Three competing theoretical views on the
impact of the Internet on social capital:
1. Internet increases social capital
2. Internet decreases social capital
3. Internet adds-on to social capital

6. Contact with Near-By Kin
250
Total
200
Days per Year
150
Phone
100
Face-to-face
50
Email
Letters
0
Never Daily
Email Use

7. Contact with Far-Away Kin
160
140
Total
Days per Year
120
100
80
Email
60
40 Phone
20 Face-to-face Letters
0
Never Daily
Email Use

8. Conclusions
• Users are engaging in social activities online
• Time online leads to more email
• Daily users use high % of email for contact
• Glocalization
– Highest use of email is for long distance
– Local interaction also relies on email
• Email adds on to F2F, phone, & letter contact
– Neither increases or decreases them

9. Background Information on SL
• The start
• The development
• Current state
• Key SL terms
• Future plans
• The SL history wiki
• SL on Wikipedia

10. Three Questions:
• Is SL a community?
• What is the nature of relationships in SL?
• What is the “game” in SL and how is it
linked to questions of community?

11. The nature of communication in SL
• SL is a unique
environment,
different from email
and IM:
– Communication with
strangers possible.
– No co-location in real
space necessary.
– Avatars as
representations.

12. Is SL a community?
• Evidence of community
– Wiki history
– Membership
• Characteristics of the SL community
– Dispersed
– Changing
• Few studies on the SL community

14. Social Circles in SL
• Defining friendship in SL
• Urban societies (Simmel, Milgram &
Wellman)
• Boundaries of private and public time
(Zerubavel, Goffman)
• Social cues-signaling (Donath)
• Sex in SL

15. The Creative Commons
• Productive play (Pearce)
– Consumer/producer boundary
• Vernacular creativity in SL (Burgess)
– The everyday creative practice
• Avatars: representation of self (Goffman)

16. Photography

17. Concluding Remarks & Questions
• More research is
needed to see if
hype actually gets
realized
• SL in part can be
seen as a
community
• Vernacular
presentation of self
• SL creates new
cultural capital