INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE WEB: POSITIONING
IN BLENDED COMMUNITIES
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Identity: Dialogical Self (Hermans, 1996, 2001; Hermans, Kempen e Van Loon, 1992)
The Self produces a polyphony of voices and a dynamic multitude of relatively autonomous I-positions in dialogical relationship among them
Community: Community of practice (Wenger, 1998, 2000; Lave e Wenger, 1991)
A set of individuals negotiates the conditions of its existence through the construction of practices in social participation.
Participation > sense of belonging > identity
Theoretical link
the centrality of negotiation processes characterises both self and community
a slide from an individually built identity to an intersubjectively built identity
Positioning trajectories are central in the definition of both identity and community.
In particular, blended communities can activate specific participation strategies, essential to shape identity dynamics through positioning and sense of belonging.
RESEARCH AIM:
to identify peculiar identity dynamics varying according the double interactive context.
Online Offline
RESEARCH CONTEXT
THE DIALOGICAL METHODOLOGY FOR THE “BLENDED COMMUNITY” IDENTITY
To represent the dialogical nature of the Self we need a blended methodology:
a quantitative and extensive tool combined with a qualitative and in-depth tool
Social Network Analysis (SNA) (Scott, 1992; Wasserman e Faust, 1994; Mazzoni, 2006)
suitable to the general exploration of identity dynamics, in both virtual and real communities
Qualitative content analysis (Rositi, 1970; Losito, 1993)
to arrange data for SNA by making a detailed exploration of identity dynamics
Blended methodology (Aviv, Elrich, Ravid e Geva, 2003; Martinez, Dimitriadis, Rubia, Gomez, de la Fuente, 2003)
a qualitative use of SNA is proper to analyze specific identity positionings
We built the identity networks through an original version of SNA, that we called Positioning Network Analysis (PNA).
It works through three complementary stages:
1. Qualitative content analysis:
- construction of a categories’ grid where a range
of positionings, data driven and theory driven (Hermans
1996; Spadaro, 2007), is produced;
- construction of an adjacency matrix, produced through
the identification of links between eliciting and elicited positionings, in order to perform SNA.
2. Social Network Analysis:
neighbour analysis (density index): to investigate the level of cohesion among nodes which are positionings of community participants;
degree centrality index: to examine each node's centrality and power; nodes having more links to others are in a central position.
The classic SNA indices take on a specific meaning:
the density index marks the complete repertory of positionings used by each participant and by the whole community;
the index of centrality identifies strategic positionings activating the greatest number of others positionings and being elicited by most of the other positionings.
3. Multiple levels of identity:
positioning trajectories can be observed through the dialogical interplay of three identity levels:
Individual level: the dialogue between positionings inside a single individual. According to Hermans' Dialogical Self theory a continuous interior dialogue between the voices of different I-positions takes place inside each of us;
Interpersonal level: I-positionings are elicited by other social actors. The position of a participant in the interaction systematically recalls an I- position of his/her counterpart;
Community level: the dialogue connects all the individual and interpersonal positionings of the community members, together.
CATEGORIES’ GRID
INDIVIDUAL Positionings:
- internal (“I think that…”,“I am”)
- external (“I come from Valenzano”)
- open (“I don’t know if…”)
COLLECTIVE Positionings:
- internal (“We meet in our Skype”)
- external (“the Savino’s lessons”)
- open (“we hadn’t understood”)
- internal related to
sub-group
(“we belonging to group A”)
- internal related to role
(“we tutors”)
- open related to role
(“we tutors could do it”)
RESULTS: POSITIONING NETWORKS
Group 1
In group 1 the positionings’ network changes according to the communicative environment : the on line network is founded on an internal individual positioning underlining the subjective dimension, while the off line network is founded on an internal collective positioning underlining the belonging to the community.
Even in forum A e B, which represent the discussions of the two subgroups in group 2, the internal individual positioning is central for the identity network. The link with the otherness is represented by a different internal collective positioning as it represents the belonging to the subgroup rather than the reference to the whole community as it is given by the internal collective positioning of the whole group 2.
DISCUSSION
The first two stages of PNA show dissimilar outcomes in the two groups by marking that communicative environment doesn’t play a crucial role in the discrimination of positionings.
Dissimilar findings confirm that positioning trajectories only change according to members’ subjectivity. So members’ individuality influences the use of community’s contexts through positioning trajectories.
RESULTS: IDENTITY LEVELS
online context
Previous findings become more interesting by considering the three dialogical levels of identity analysis – individual, interpersonal and community one.
At first we found in the online context, in both groups, a dominance of the individual level looking at the otherness.
Furthermore, in online context of both groups, it is possible to identify a funnel-like trajectory of the network which gradually opens from the internal individual positioning of the individual level to the social dimension of other levels. In group 1 the boundary positioning was integrated into the interpersonal level and the internal collective positioning broadens the identity network in the community level. In group 2 the internal collective and direct interpersonal positionings mark the social space of identity.
RESULTS: IDENTITY LEVELS
offline context
In offline context of both groups there is a dominance of the interpersonal level looking at the individuality.
Furthermore, in offline context there is a discrimination between two groups:
- in group 1 the network shows an opposite funnel-like trajectory than that one of online context. It is centered on the collective positioning in the individual level, closing to the subjective dimension of the boundary positioning in the interpersonal level and the individual internal positioning in the community level.
- while group 2 shows a far more similar setting between online and offline contexts. In both cases the network of positionings is centered on the individual internal positioning, opening to the otherness. In offline context the boundary positioning acts as a mediating element between the individual and social dimensions.
DISCUSSION
The third stage of PNA shows the individual dimension of the online context widening to social dimension and the interpersonal dimension of the offline context restricting to individual dimension.
Being similar and opposite let the two contexts influence each other, blend the features of their interactive environments in the positioning trajectories of a “blended identity”.
The same ‘blended’ dynamics emerge comparing the two groups in the first two stages of PNA: group 1 is centered on collective dimension looking at individual polarities, whereas group 2 is centered on individual dimension looking at collective polarities.
The subjectivity influences the use of the contexts determining, time by time, the most appropriate positioning for the interactive context and the specific situation. Positioning can shape interactive environments giving way to a “blended identity”.
In the exploration of two groups, the individuality shape the contexts through the positionings; in the inquiry of identity levels, the contexts mutually influence by shaping positioning trajectories. Intermingling subjectivity, positionings and environments produces a “blended identity”.
CONCLUSION
The identity trajectory is constructed in a dialogical way: positionings of individuals, interactive situations, contexts’ features and technological artefacts make community structure and personal identity. The dialogical trajectory marks the close relationship between individual and community identity.
In conclusion we can affirm that the mutual influence between both real and virtual contexts and both personal and social identity produces the community: by mingling individual and collective dimensions of community, identity dynamics and contexts mutually shape.
Specifically the technological mediation in a communicative context offers the possibility for highly personalised and diversified community participation and sense of belonging, both supporting a dialogical construction of the Self.
- Войдите, чтобы оставлять комментарии