ResultsIntroductionThis poster presents the preliminary findings of a case study

examining self-presentation in asynchronous online discussions

(AOD). The goal of the study is to describe the experiences of

students as they created and managed social identities within

AOD, knowingly or unknowingly. The study also examines if and

how these identity management experiences changed or

evolved during students’ college careers.

Problem Statement• Learning & satisfaction can increase when students

participate in discussions, face-to-face or online• AOD is a staple of higher education courses• AOD is unlike any traditional teaching method & thus

requires study in order to be implemented effectively • Students in the same college class, with the same materials

and instructional methods, may have very different perceptions of the course

• Little is known about how students communicate with each other via AOD

• Existing research is often in pre-service teacher education courses and/or graduate education

• Understanding how college students engage in impression management & develop social identities within AOD can help better develop online discussion environments to support learning

Preliminary AssertionsPurposeful Action & Autonomy: Students may have performance or

learning goals that affect their academic motivations (Dweck, 2000). These

goals & the associated motivations structure how students engage in

impression management within AOD. Students’ first priority is getting the

participation points; the second is engaging in meaningful activities. Their

satisfaction is increased with purposeful action, & their frustration is often

(but not always) increased with closed-ended questions, aka “time-

wasting” AOD. They do not want to be forced to act like “Singles” in a

“With” environment. The lines they present are of students who value the

sharing of multiple perspectives (Goffman, 1959, 1963).

Presentational & Avoidance Rituals: Students often use impression

management strategies such as Presentational Rituals to show themselves

as competent & willing to listen to others, whether or not they understand

the discussion’s purpose. However, a greater level of impression

management and social presence is visible when learners understand

AOD’s purpose & are willing to actively engage in dialogue. When learners

don't understand AOD’s purpose, they are much more likely to use

Avoidance Rituals (Goffman, 1967).

Face Protective Strategies: Students with lower self-efficacy (in a

particular course, and/or in general) are more likely to use face protective

strategies for themselves; those with more efficacy are more likely to use

strategies that support their own and classmates’ faces (Goffman, 1967).

Social Presence: All participants appear to have selected a few strategies

for increasing social presence and use these repeatedly. Patterns are

evident for courses they like and dislike. However, the blend of strategies

for each student is different and is itself a reflection of the participant’s

personality (Swan & Shih, 2005).

Acknowledgements

ReferencesAnderson, B., & Simpson, M. (2004). Group and class contexts for learning and support online:

Learning and affective support online in small group and class contexts. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5(3),1-15.

Burkart, G. (2010). An analysis of online discourse and its application to literacy learning. Journal of Literacy and Technology, 11(1), 64-88.

Cain, D.L., & Pitre, P.E. (2008). The effect of computer mediated conferencing and computer assisted instruction on student learning outcomes. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(3), 31-52.

Chadwick, S., & Ralston, E. (2010). Perspective taking in structured and unstructured online discussions. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 22(1), 1-11.

Dennen, V. P. (2005). From message posting to learning dialogues: Factors affecting learner participation in asynchronous discussions. Distance Education, 26(1), 127-148. Dweck, C.S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.

Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of everyday self. New York, NY: Doubleday.Goffman, E. (1967) Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. New York, NY: Pantheon

Books.Maurino, P.S. (2006). Looking for critical thinking in online threaded discussions. Journal of

Educational Technology Systems, 35(3), 241-260.Swan, K. (2005). Social Presence and e-Learning. In IADIS Virtual MultiConference on Computer

Science and Information Systems (MMCIS 2005).Trees, A. R., Kerssen-Griep, J., & Hess, J. A. (2009). Earning influence by communicating respect:

Facework's contributions to effective instructional feedback. Communication Education, 58(3), 397-416.

I would like to thank my committee for the support and direction they have provided. In particular, I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. Mayall for her prompt responses, encouraging attitude, and incredibly helpful feedback. Also, I deeply appreciate the work of Bess Kershisnik for coding a portion of my data so I can establish if interrater reliability exists in regards to social presence. I would like to thank my employer, Elmhurst College, for giving me the time to attend this conference. And THANK YOU for taking the time to review my poster & share your ideas, suggestions, questions, or other comments!

Preliminary Findings Regarding Impression Management and Social Presence within Asynchronous Online Discussions

Kimberly M. Harrison, MA, Northern Illinois University, Doctoral Candidate Committee: Dr. Hayley Mayall (Co-chair), Dr. Cindy York (Co-chair), & Dr. Ying Xie

Research Questions1. How do students use impression management to develop

social identities (whether intentionally or unintentionally) within AOD?

2. How do students’ perceptions of AOD affect their social identities within AODs?

Methodology• Case study approach• 5 students approaching graduation, ages 20-25 (2F & 3M)• Individual & group Interviews; analysis of AOD transcripts• Theoretical frameworks: • “Face is the social presentation of ourselves; the ‘self’

that we want and believe others perceive us as having” (Trees et al., 2009, p. 398) – based within Goffman’s (1959, 1967) Impression Management theory

• Social presence is “the ability of participants in online discussions both to perceive other participants as ‘real people’ and to project themselves socially and affectively into the discussion” (Swan, 2005, p. 20) – based within Garrison, Anderson, & Archer’s (2001, 2010) Community of Inquiry framework

Jay

I'm required to post. I kind of

feel like I have a voice, but it's

assigned to me.” I try to present myself

professionally....I want

someone to read my

answer and be like,

“Oh, that's a really

good answer.”I want to say my

opinion, but....I love

to have people tell

me I'm wrong. I like

to have that debate.

In face

Disagreement is not a face threat;

line = debater

• Affective* : Emotions, beliefs, values: “how invested I was”• Cohesive: Group references (we/our) & vocatives• Interactive: Agreement/disagreement

• Affective* : Self-disclosure, paralanguage, values• Cohesive: Vocatives, some group references• Interactive*: Approval, personal advice, acknowledgment

• Affective* : Self-disclosure, values, humor• Cohesive: Vocatives, typically to agree or compliment• Interactive: Agreement, personal advice

• Affective : Value, humor • Cohesive: Vocatives• Interactive*: Agreement / disagreement, acknowledgment

• Affective : Self-disclosure, paralinguistic cues, values• Cohesive: Vocatives• Interactive*: Approval, agreement

Threaded discussion can

be a necessary evil...It can

be fun...and actually

useful to understand and

learn.

I would put more thought

into it and more of

myself...it shows here, too.

Sometimes when you hear that

real-life experience, it shows that

you are human. You actually did

this stuff and it's not just words.[If] the instructor is into it…you

feel more obliged to put more

effort into it….Especially if they

respond back personally, that's

almost like another push. It's

like, “Well, now I have to

respond back to it!”

Mark

Al Marti

Social presence

Self-disclosure

Instructional Face Support

I never really had anything to

say...."What are they looking at that I'm not?"....So, I was

definitely more shy to respond and

discuss....I didn't know what people were going to think

of my post.At first, since I wasn't really used to it and

I'm not a good writer…I struggled a lot. But…I've been

able to pick up on it more....I feel like I can give my opinion. I will

respond to others.

I'm thinking about them as people. I don't

necessarily picture "I know who this is”…I just think, "Oh, someone just went through

this!“… I almost think about it

like if I was doing my own research and someone said this about it.

Any countering opinion makes for a good conversation

because you can get more in-depth with it....I was just trying to keep the conversation going. Throw my own little two cents

in there and just keep the information coming.

A "big pet peeve is just not getting

responses in general. That one, just absolutely kills

me."

Al quickly responded that he writes, "I

disagree!” One of the other

participants described how he

monitors his tone in his dissenting opinion

and Al said, “Yeah. That makes sense.

Basically it's to say, ‘I feel that your post is wrong or inaccurate

or unjust in some way.’ Explain why in some way. And then

back it up with a fact.

Disagreement & Face

Threats to Classmates

Face Threat = No response

Avoidance Ritual

No mutual face support but social

presence

I don't want easy

points; I want to learn

something. I want to

get value out of it.

It was going back and forth….But in

the end, it came full circle....“This was

a really great conversation and I hope

I didn't offend you. You didn't offend

me.” And it was a cool moment:

“This is a safe place and we're all

really comfortable with each other!”.

You don't really

know what to put

there. You put

something and

then you realize,

"Oh crap. That's

wrong."…It's

public, and then

everyone is judging

you.

Face threat: Shame

Face support: Mutual respect