Social Influence in Computer-Mediated Communication: The Effects of Anonymity on Group Behavior

By Tom Postmes, Russell Spears, K. Sakhel, Daphne de Groot. 2001

493 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Communication, Social Psychology, Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4f767daf2ce1950db572d3e971bd681ec9b294e3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Communication

In Social Psychology

In Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

Citations in the corpus

Social influence: compliance and conformity. (2004, background): “Using this setting, Postmes et al. (2001) showed that members of anonymous groups unwittingly primed with a particular group norm were more likely to follow (and socially transmit) that norm than were members of identifiable groups, an effect mediated by their identification with the group.”
Anonymity and Self-Disclosure on Weblogs (2007, background): “In CMC, visual anonymity typically refers to the lack of any visual representation of a person, such as pictures or video clips (Barreto & Ellemers, 2002; Lea, Spears, & de Groot, 2001; Postmes et al., 2001).”
The internet as psychological laboratory. (2006, background): “…2002; Sagarin et al. 2004), implicit attitudes (e.g., Nosek et al. 2002), decoding of nonverbal cues (Hortsman 2003), group dynamics and interaction (Postmes et al. 1999, 2001), relationship formation (McKenna et al. 2002), consumption habits (e.g., Iacobucci 2003), adult attachment (e.g., Wei et…”
Social Influence Online: The Impact of Social Validation and Likability on Compliance (2013, background): “Certainly, the work of Larry Rosen would suggest our results might not replicate in different generations (Rosen, 2011). However, the work of Guadagno et al. (in press) suggest the results will generalize within generations. These issues should be addressed in future research. There are also implica”
The positive and negative implications of anonymity in Internet social interactions: "On the Internet, Nobody Knows You're a Dog" (2007, background): “(Coffey &Woolworth, 2004; Flanagin et al., 2002; Joinson, 2000; Lea et al., 2001; Postmes et al., 2001; Reicher et al., 1995; Spears & Lea, 1992; Spears & Lea, 1994; Spears et al., 2002).”
Normative influences on thoughtful online participation (2011, methodology): “…and behaviors within an online group can be induced by increasing the individual’s social identification with the group, particularly in anonymous settings [30, 34], although some work has also examined conformity to externally induced norms such as a prosocial vs. efficacy orientation [30].”