Social Presence and the Sociocultural Dynamics of

Online Learning Communities

Charlotte N. (Lani) Gunawardena Ph.D.Professor

Organizational Learning & Instructional Technology

College of EducationThe University of New Mexico, USA

Social Presence (SP)Degree to which a person is perceived as a “real person”

in mediated communication

C. N. Gunawardena

Intimacy(SP of Medium, differs in different media)TV vs. AudioNon-verbal cues

vs.

Immediacy (psychological distanceof Communicator,differs in same medium)

Non-verbally:•formality of dress

•Verbally: aloofness

vs.

Social Presence, the degree to which a person feels “socially present” in mediated communication, links to the larger social context of an online environment, including:

interaction

group cohesion

verbal and non-verbal communication

attitudes and motivation

social equality, etc.

Social Presence

Significant factor in improving satisfaction (Hackman & Walker, 1990, Gunawardena & Zittle, 1997)

Can be cultured (Johansen et. al. 1988)

Users develop techniques to overcome absence of social context cues:

Emoticons :-) :-( ;-)Metalinguistic cues: “hmmm” “yuk”In MUDS, SP and interaction are created by commands such as: say, emote, whisper

Social Presence as a Predictor of Learner Satisfaction in CMC – Gunawardena & Zittle 1997, AMJDE 11, 3

How effective is SP as a predictor of learner satisfaction?

Study CMC from a social-relational perspective

Study Participants

62% female, 38% male Comfort with technology 44% 50 graduate students from 5

universities– San Diego State N=8– Texas A & M N=11– Univ. of New Mexico N=14– U. of Wisconsin-Madison N=7– Univ. of Wyoming N=10

Social Presence as a Predictor of Learner Satisfaction(Stepwise Regression Models)

Social Presence

Equal

Tech

Attitude

Active

Barriers

Capable

Trained

Independent Variables Model 1 Model 2 Dependent Variable

58%

6%

6%

5%

60%

6%

4%

75%70%

Learner

Satisfaction

The Effects of Emoticon Use on Mean Satisfaction Mediated by Perceived Social

Presence

I intentionally used emoticons to express my feelings

Note: Social Presence artificially dichotomized at medium for clarity.

1 2 3 4 5 610

20

30

40

50

Sat

isfa

ctio

n

___ SP High

---- SP Low

C C MMCC

C C MMCC

P

R

E

SE

N

C

E

DiaNaDiaNaDiaNaDiaNa

Praising

Reinforcement

Eye Contact

Smiling Encouragement

Nonverbal Cues, Names

Comfort

Experiences

Oh please,Talk to me!

• Virtual Pubs & Cyber Cafes

• Virtual costume party

• Introductions (self-disclosure)

• Moderators creating a sense of community & being there

• Formats for interaction - story telling

• Timely feedback

• Real time interaction – Chats, teleconferences

• Techniques – e.g. emoticons, pictures

Social Presence & Online Course DesignSocial Presence & Online Course Design

Developing an Online Community

Community, Collaboration, and Interaction must become central in course design

Assessment must reward collaboration, contribution to community, and products developed within the community

Example: In Keresan Pueblo communities of New Mexico giftedness is defined as an individual’s ability to contribute to the good of the community

Examine if there are differences in students’ perceptions of online group process and group development in two national contexts, Mexico and USA

Determine if differences could be described as cultural differences

Examine if there are differences in students’ perceptions of online group process and group development in two national contexts, Mexico and USA

Determine if differences could be described as cultural differences

PURPOSE OF CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY

Gunawardena, Nolla, Wilson, López,-Islas, Ramirez-Angel, Megchun-Alpizar (2001)

Significant differences in perception for norming and performing stages Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing Adjourning – Tuckman

Mexico more collectivist than USA Country differences rather than age or gender

differences

Significant differences in perception for norming and performing stages Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing Adjourning – Tuckman

Mexico more collectivist than USA Country differences rather than age or gender

differences

Group Process & Group Development Online, USA & Mexico

Gunawardena, Nolla, Wilson, López,-Islas, Ramirez-Angel, Megchun-Alpizar (2001)

Focus groups identified the following influences

1. Language

2. Power distance

3. Collectivist vs. individualist tendencies

4. Conflict

5. Social presence

6. Time frame, and

7. Technical skills

Focus groups identified the following influences

1. Language

2. Power distance

3. Collectivist vs. individualist tendencies

4. Conflict

5. Social presence

6. Time frame, and

7. Technical skills

Group Process & Group Development Online, USA & Mexico

Gunawardena, Nolla, Wilson, López,-Islas, Ramirez-Angel, Megchun-Alpizar, Distance Education (2001)