Psycho-Babble Administration | about the operation of this site | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Virtual large groups

Posted by Dr. Bob on September 9, 2004, at 17:54:31

Hi, everyone,

I just read a chapter I found really interesting. Some excerpts (not all exact quotes):

> A definition of the Large Group (LG) can be, "any group with such a large number of participants they cannot be encompassed in a single glance." Seeing is important. Therefore any exchange on the Internet involves some LG dynamics. When people cannot see all the details, fertile ground for imagination and projection is found.
>
> De Mare (1975) recommends exploration of "meetings of the same members over a considerable time, and not simply a sudden short burst of meetings" as is usually done in conferences.
>
> Developing a sense of citizenship is one of the main tasks of participants of the LG. There may be active or passive members, but they all feel a sense of belonging. The degree of involvement changes through time.
>
> Van Vliet and Burgers (1987) argue that communities contain: social interaction, a shared value system, and a shared symbolic system (for example, in cyberspace, emoticons and special abbreviations).
>
> 2 factors work in favour of creating an illusion of safety in the virtual LG (VLG). The 1st is the anonymity of the members, which reduces the risk of rejection. McKenna et al. (2002) found that relationships develop closeness significantly faster over the Internet than offline. The 2nd factor is a core group that carries on group norms and an atmosphere of cohesion. The newcomer might sometimes have the notion that the group is dominated by this subgroup, however, once the newcomer is ready to respect the group norms and its veterans, he or she can be included.
>
> LGs tend to generate strong emotions in their members and to restrict, or even temporarily block, clear thinking. The lack of other than textual cues in cyberspace encourages projections.
>
> The bigger systems are, the more difficult it is to predict their processes.
>
> The LG is full of negative feelings: the frustration of not being heard or mirrored, the alienation one feels in the crowd, the bombarding by stimuli that blocks cognitive functions, the tendency to find some refuge from losing one's identity in the mob by clinging to subgroups and attacking other subgroups.
>
> Cyberspace provides a wider containing ability than is anticipated. McKenna and Green (2002) mention that anonymity helps members to express how they really feel and think.
>
> Holding is the main function of the leader in the VLG. The holding function is most important in cyberspace because this space is far from being a holding environment by its basic characteristics. The leader's holding functions as an anchor to stabilize participants and reduce their anxieties so they feel safe enough to interact. Providing holding also has to do with clear boundaries. In LGs the boundaries are looser, so the need to clarify them becomes stronger. The VLG has even vaguer boundaries.
>
> Most of the forums on the Internet are not process groups. There is no need for the leader to interpret the process unless some crisis occurs or the group is severely distracted from achieving its goals.
>
> Contrary to what happens in face-to-face LGs, the main transference towards the leader identified in the VLG is idealization. Anzieu (1984) argued that transference generally appears as negative, but it can be argued that this is an artifact of the approach that focuses on authority and leadership.
>
> The lack of cues other than textual ones on the Internet can lead to projection of aggressive feelings, but also idealization. Idealization may be enhanced by virtue of the medium. When the participants are not very computer-sophisticated, they can easily project wisdom and computer-wizardry onto the leader. In asynchronous groups, the leader has enough time to consider responses and not act them out, even to consult a colleague, which makes the leader's interventions more optimal, so the idealization has some basis in reality.
>
> Unfortunately, idealization is a double-edged sword. It fosters unrealistic expectations of the group leader, and when these expectations are not met, the group becomes furious. Also, it creates an intensive counter-transference reaction of the leader. It is very easy to fall into the trap.
>
> We can argue that processes in the VLG reveal the Internet Unconscious, which contains an illusory belief that ultimate freedom of speech is achieved in cyberspace and that forum members always show respect and tolerance to different opinions.
>
> The most salient difference between groups in reality and in the virtual environment is the ability to develop norms of tolerance and even intimacy in cyberspace.

--Weinberg H. The large group in a virtual environment. In: "The Large Group Re-Visited: The Herd, Primal Horde, Crowds and Masses". Schneider S, Weinberg H. Jessica Kingsley Publishers 2003.

Bob


Share
Tweet  

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Administration | Framed

poster:Dr. Bob thread:388862
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20040902/msgs/388862.html