Abstract
The importance of online social spaces is growing. New Web 2.0 resources allow the creation of social networks by any netizen with minimal technical skills. These communities can be extremely narrowly focussed. In this paper, I identify two potential costs of membership in narrowly focussed virtual communities. First, that narrowly focussed communities can polarise attitudes and prejudices leading to increased social cleavage and division. Second, that they can lead sick individuals to revel in their illness, deliberately indulging in their disease and denying the edicts of the medical profession. I specifically examine illness communities centred on the now defunct Multiple Personality Disorder. I highlight these potential problems and point to some technologies that may help combat them.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. American Psychiatric Association, Washington, DC, 1994
American Psychological Association. Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. American Psychologist, 47: 1597–1611, 1992
American Psychological Association. Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Accessed from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code2002.html November 19, 2007
BBC News. Social Networks Top Google Search. December 18, 2006. Accessed from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6189809.stm December 21, 2006
M.C. Bier, S.A. Sherblom, M.A. Gallo. Ethical Issues in a Study of Internet Use: Uncertainty, Responsibility, and the Spirit of Research Relationships. Ethics and Behavior, 6: 141–151, 1996
G.D. Bishop, D.G. Myers. Informational Influence in Group Discussion. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 12: 92–104, 1974
D. Byrne. The Attraction Paradigm. Academic Press, New York, NY, 1971
M. Calore. Web Mashups Turn Citizens Into Washington’s Newest Watchdogs. Wired, April 26, 2007. Accessed from http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2007/04/maplight November 15, 2007
L.C. Charland. A Madness for Identity: Psychiatric Labels, Consumer Autonomy, and the Perils of the Internet. Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology, 11(4): 335–349, 2004
Center for the Digital Future. Surveying the Digital Future. 2006: Accessed from www.digitalcenter.org/ March 10, 2007
P. DiMaggio, J. Evans, B. Bryson. Have Americans’ Social Attitudes Become More Polarised? American Journal of Sociology, 102: 690–755, 1996
H. Dreyfus. Anonymity Versus Commitment: The Dangers of Education on the Internet. Ethics and Information Technology 1(1): 15–21, 1999
C. Elliot. Better Than Well: American Medicine Meets the American Dream. Norton, New York, NY, 2003
J.H. Evans. Have Americans’ Attitudes Become More Polarised? – An Update. Social Science Quarterly, 84(1): 71–90, 2003
W.A. Galston. Does the Internet Strengthen Community? The Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy, 19(4), 1999. Accessed from http://www.puaf.umd.edu/IPPP/fall1999/internet_community.htm May 12, 2007
D.J. Isenberg. Group Polarisation: A Critical Review and Meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30: 1025–1054, 1986
D.A. Jones. The Polarising Effects of New Media Messages. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 14(2): 158–174, 2001
H. Keller, S. Lee. Ethical Issues Surrounding Human Participants Research Using the Internet, Ethics and Behavior, 13(3): 211–219, 2003
V. Krebs. Political Patterns on the WWW – Divided We Stand … Still. 2004: Accessed from http://www.orgnet.com/divided2.html August 10, 2007
V. Krebs. Political Books and Polarised Readers? A New Political Pattern Emerges. 2006: Accessed from http://www.orgnet.com/divided.html August 10, 2007
P.B. de Laat. Trusting Virtual Trust. Ethics and Information Technology, 7: 167–180. 2006
H. Lamm. Will an Observer Advise Higher Risk Taking After Hearing a Discussion of the Decision Problem? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6: 467–471, 1976
T.C. May. The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto, 1999, Reprinted in P. Ludlow (ed.). Crypto Anarchy, Cyberstates and Pirate Utopias, pp. 61–64. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2001
M. Mendelsohn, R. Nadeau. The Magnification and Minimization of Social Cleavages by the Broadcast and Narrowcast News Media. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8: 374–389, 1996
H. Merskey. Misprisions of Identity. Philosophy, Psychiatry and Psychology, 11(4): 351–355, 2004
D.G. Myers, H. Lamm. The Polarising Effect of Group Discussion. American Scientist, 63: 297–303, 1971
H. Nissenbaum. Securing Trust Online: Wisdom or Oxymoron? Boston University Law Review, 81: 635–664, 2001
P.S. Nivola. Thinking About Political Polarisation. The Brookings Institute Policy Brief, 137: 1–8, 2005
M. Parsell and J. Duke-Yonge. Virtual Communities of Enquiry: An Argument for their Necessity and Advice for Their Creation. E-Learning, 4(2): 181–193, 2007. Available at http://www.wwwords.co.uk/rss/abstract.asp?j=elea&aid=3031
T. Postmes, S.A. Haslam, R. Swaab. Social Influence in Small Groups: An Interactive Model of Social Identity Formation. European Review of Social Psychology, 16: 1–42, 2005
T. Postmes, R. Spears, M. Lea. Breaching or Building Social Boundaries? SIDE Effects of Computer-Mediated Communication. Communication Research, 25: 689–715, 1998
L. Rainie and J. Horrigan. Election 2006 Online. Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2007. Accessed from http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/199/report_display.asp August 10, 2007
T. Russell. Facebook Boots Pseudonymous Blogger, Then Caves to Blogosphere Pressure. Wired, November 1, 2007. Accessed from http://blog.wired.com/business/2007/11/facebook-boots-.html November 21, 2007
R. Spears, T. Postmes, M. Lea, A. Wolbert. The Power of Influence and the Influence of Power in Virtual Groups: A SIDE Look at CMC and the Internet. The Journal of Social Issues Special Issue: Social impact of the Internet, 58: 91–108, 2002
C. Townley, M. Parsell. Technology and Academic Virtue: Student Plagiarism Through the Looking Glass. Ethics and Information Technology 6(4): 271–277, 2004
C. Townley, M. Parsell. The Cost of a Common Good: Putting a Price on Spam. Philosophy and the Contemporary World 12(2): 68–75. 2005
C. Townley and M. Parsell. Cyber Disobedience: Gandhian Cyberpunks. Scan, 3(3). 2006; Available at http://scan.net.au/scan/journal/display.php?journal_id=81
K. Vonnegut. Mother Night. Dell Publishing: New York, NY, 1999
D. Williams.(2005). Why Game Studies Now? Games and Culture 1(1): 13–16
Acknowledgements
Special thanks to Townley for continued discussions in the area of ethics and ICT, Deranty for emphasizing the importance of identity, members of my virtual philosophy community for promoting open dialogue, and two anonymous referees for incredibly helpful and detailed comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Parsell, M. Pernicious virtual communities: Identity, polarisation and the Web 2.0. Ethics Inf Technol 10, 41–56 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-008-9153-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-008-9153-y