Presented by Frances VC RyanEdinburgh Napier UniversityCentre for Social Informatics

“Personal online reputations: Managing what you can’t control”

DARTS5 Conference:Discover Academic Research, Training, and Support

2nd June 2016, Dartington Hall, Totnes, England

f.ryan@napier.ac.uk | @cleverfrances | www.JustAPhD.com

Overview of presentation

Research themes and questions Literature review Theoretical framework Methods of investigation Early findings Next steps Discussion

What’s the research about?

How online information contributes to the building, maintenance, and evaluation of personal reputations

― Personal reputation: Private individuals, rather than corporate identity and brand

Two broad research themes: (1) The means by which people evaluate or assess the personal reputations of others from the online evidence available to them

(2) How people manage their own personal reputations through their use of online information, and to what extent those behaviours are intentional

OK, but what does that mean?

© Red Rose Exile

© Frances Ryan

© Frances Ryan

© Frances Ryan

RQ2: How do individuals use online information to build and manage their

reputations?

RQ4: To what extent do individuals actively practise identity and reputation building and evaluation online?

RQ1:

How do individuals

build identities for

themselves online?

RQ3:

How do individuals evaluate

the identities and

reputations of others based

on the online information

available to them?

The research questions

How do individuals build identities for themselves online?

How do individuals use online information to build and manage their reputations?

How do individuals evaluate the identities and reputations of others based on the online information available to them?

To what extent do individuals actively practise identity and reputation building and evaluation online?

Where’s the literature found?

(Almost) Everywhere!

Information science Everyday life information seeking (ELIS) Citation analysis

Computing Employment research Human-computer interaction Human resources management Information systems Management and organisational studies Marketing Media and communication studies Physical and mental health

© Frances Ryan

Created by the individual that the identity represents – and others

Different presentations of self for different audiences

“Representations of self/selves” that individuals create for or about themselves

Key terms: Identity

© S

tefa

no M

orte

llaro

© Red Rose Exile

© José Luís Agapito

Key terms: Reputation

Everyone has (at least) one!

Determined by others based on the information available to them

The personal opinions and character judgements one individual has for another

© Martin Tews

© Sarah Reid

Key terms: “Real world”

Blurred lines

Intentional transfer of offline activities to online environments

Trading information for online conveniences

If you’re not online, are you real?

© Frances Ryan

Key themes in the literature

Information sharing

Information quality and accuracy

Employment and career opportunities

Friends and friends-of-friends

“Real names”, pseudonyms,and anonymity

© Frances Ryan

What does the literature tell us?

Employers conduct social media reviews pre- and post-employment

© Frances Ryan

What does the literature tell us?

Friends and friends-of-friends can impact reputation

© Frances Ryan

What does the literature tell us?

“Real names” and anonymity are key debates

© Frances Ryan

At least some self-regulation and censorship by individuals

What does the literature tell us?

© Horatio3K

Mind the gap! (1)

To what extent are individuals evaluating the reputations of others based on the information found about them online?

What processes do individuals follow to identify and collect online information about others?

How is online information about individuals rated, assessed, or validated for the purposes of reputation evaluation?

To what extent does the quality of information collected impact the determination of individuals’ reputations?

Mind the gap! (2)

How do individuals manage online information regarding their combined professional and private reputations?

How do individuals manage their online and offline reputations as one “real world” reputation?

To what extent do individuals feel more or less free or restricted because of the blurred lines between their online and offline worlds?

To what extent do individuals actively monitor their online footprints for the purpose of reputation management? If so, how and to what extent?

How do people relate to, seek, and use information?

(Bates, 1999, p. 6)

How do we handle ideas and knowledge, both our own and other people’s?

(Howkins, 2009, p. 1)

Alignment with some “big questions”

© Frances Ryan

Developing a theoretical framework for empirical work

Difficult: What literature should be considered?

1. General materials related to research themes across many domains(e.g. Human resources, marketing, information systems,

physical and mental health)

2. Specific material on academic reputations evident in citation analysis

3. Contextual material from everyday life information seeking (ELIS) studies

Developing a theoretical framework for empirical work

Difficult: Which literature should be considered?

1. General materials related to research themes across many domains(e.g. Human resources, marketing, information systems,

physical and mental health)

2. Specific material on academic reputations evident in citation analysis

3. Contextual material from everyday life information seeking (ELIS) studies

Lots of options:- Quantitative - Qualitative

Developing a theoretical framework for empirical work

Difficult: Which literature should be considered?

1. General materials related to research themes across many domains(e.g. Human resources, marketing, information systems,

physical and mental health)

2. Specific material on academic reputations evident in citation analysis

3. Contextual material from everyday life information seeking (ELIS) studies

Mostly Quantitative

Developing a theoretical framework for empirical work

Difficult: Which literature should be considered?

1. General materials related to research themes across many domains(e.g. Human resources, marketing, information systems,

physical and mental health)

2. Specific material on academic reputations evident in citation analysis

3. Contextual material from everyday life information seeking (ELIS) studies

Largely Qualitative

How best to investigate both research themes?

The challenge? Establishing a way to examine both research themes simultaneously

Qualitative methods deemed most appropriate

Semi-structured, in-depth interviews to discuss participants’ own practices

Answering questions on evaluation of others proved more difficult

Four potential solutions …

Option 1: Profile mock-ups

Create false user profiles

Information mimics situations from literature

Participants review mock-ups

Interviews to discuss how reputations are evaluated

© W

ireframeS

ketcher

© PitchStock

Option 2: Participant screen shots

Screen shots of participants’ online profiles

Others evaluate the reputations of each other based on the screen shots

Interviews to discuss how reputations are evaluated

© Frances Ryan

Option 3: Observation

Participants discuss evaluation of others during interview

Participants interacting with social media accounts with interviewer present

Ethical issues regarding consent from participants’ connections© Jason Jenkins

Option 4: Diaries and interviews

Participants keep diary for one week

Simple instructions regarding what to write about

No formatting guidelines

After diary, participants take part in a semi-structured interview

© Frances Ryan

Best option: Diaries and interviews

Tradition in everyday life information seeking (ELIS) research

Rich data are reliable sources of information and eliminate the potential for inaccurate reporting

(Narayan, Case, & Edwards, 2011, p. 3)

Several studies use a combination of diary-keeping and interviews (Agosto & Hughes-Hassell, 2005; Dervin, 1983; McKenzie, 2003; Rieh, 2004)

Although studies vary, they share a common theme: combining the robustness of two forms of data

How did the diary work?

Participants kept diary for one week

Simple instructions; no formatting guidelines

Got participants thinking about their information behaviours

Diaries helped form interview guides© Frances Ryan

Collecting the data

Sample of 45 UK-based participants

Gen Y, Gen X, and Baby boomers

Short background survey

Diary for one week (electronic or hand-written)

One-hour semi-structured interviews (face-to-face or Skype)

Social media an extension of everyday lives

Varying levels self-censorship behaviours

Deleting posts

Intentional practices based on platform use

Managing “the blur”© Horatio3K

Generation X: Early findings

Difficult to convey evaluations of others

Negative views when opinions are in stark contrast to their own

Conflicting views on anonymous accounts and pseudonyms used by others

More forgiving or lenient when known in an offline environment

Generation X: Early findings

© Martin Tews

© Sarah Reid

Progress and next steps

Pilot study completed Main empirical work in progress Data analysis Thesis write-up Doctor Ryan Main empirical work Sample of 45+ participants Gen Y, Gen X, and Boomers Data analysis Thesis write-up © Frances Ryan

© Frances Ryan

Indicative bibliographyAusloos, J. (2012). The “Right to be forgotten”: Worth remembering? Computer Law & Security Review, 28(2), 143–152.

doi:10.1016/j.clsr.2012.01.006Bates, M. J. (1999). The invisible substrate of information science. Journal of the American Society for Information

Science, 50(12), 1043–1050. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1999)50:12<1043::AID-ASI1>3.3.CO;2-OCronin, B. & Askins, H.B. (2000). The web of knowledge: a festschrift in honor of Eugene Garfield . Medford, NJ:

Information TodayDuguay, S. (2014). “He has a way gayer Facebook than I do”: Investigating sexual identity disclosure and context collapse

on a social networking site. New Media & Society, 1–17. doi:10.1177/1461444814549930Fieseler, C., Meckel, M., & Ranzini, G. (2014). Professional personae: How organizational identification shapes online

identity in the workplace. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 1–18. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12103Finocchiaro, G. & Ricci, A. (2013). Quality of information, the right to oblivion, and digital reputation. In B. Custers, T.

Calders, B. Schermer, & T. Zarsky (Eds.), Discrimination and Privacy in the Information Society (Vol. 3, pp. 289–299). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-30487-3

Greidanus, E. & Everall, R. D. (2010). Helper therapy in an online suicide prevention community. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 38(2), 191–204. doi:10.1080/03069881003600991

Howkins, J. (2009). Creative ecologies: Where thinking is a proper job. St Lucia, Queensland: University of Queensland Press.

Kluemper, D. H. & Rosen, P. A. (2009). Future employment selection methods: Evaluating social networking web sites. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(6), 567–580. doi:10.1108/02683940910974134

Lingel, J. & boyd, d. (2013). “Keep it secret, keep it safe”: Information poverty, information norms, and stigma. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(5), 981–991. doi:10.1002/asi.22800

Madera, J. M. (2012). Using social networking websites as a selection tool: The role of selection process fairness and job pursuit intentions. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(4), 1276–1282. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.03.008

Mesch, G. S. & Beker, G. (2010). Are norms of disclosure of online and offline personal information associated with the disclosure of personal information online? Human Communication Research, 36(4), 570–592. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01389.x

Ollier-Malaterre, A., Rothbard, N. P., & Berg, J. M. (2013). When worlds collide in cyberspace: How boundary work in online social networks impacts professional relationships. Academy of Management Review, 38(4), 645–669. doi:10.5465/amr.2011.0235

Savolainen, R. (2008). Everyday information practices: a social phenomenological perspective. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.

Uski, S. & Lampinen, A. (2014). Social norms and self-presentation on social network sites: Profile work in action. New Media & Society, 1–18. doi:10.1177/1461444814543164

Vaast, E. (2007). Playing with masks: Fragmentation and continuity in the presentation of self in an occupational online forum. Information Technology & People, 20(4), 334–351. doi:10.1108/09593840710839789

Van Dijck, J. (2013). “You have one identity”: Performing the self on Facebook and LinkedIn. Media, Culture & Society, 35(2), 199–215. doi:10.1177/0163443712468605

Copyright attributions

Indicative bibliography (cont.)

Slide 8: Creative commons copyright (1) José Luís Agapito (www.flickr.com/blvesboy); (2) Red Rose Exile (www.flickr.com/redroseexile); (3) Stefano Mortellaro (www.flickr.com/fazen)Slide 9 and 32: Creative commons copyright (1) Martin Tews (www.flickr.com/airpark); (2) Sarah Reid (www.flickr.com/sarahreido)Slide 15 and 31: Creative commons copyright Horatio3K (www.flickr.com/horatio3k)Slide 24: Creative commons copyright (1) WireframeSketcher (wireframesketcher.com/mockups) (2) PitchStock (www.behance.net)Slide 26: Creative commons copyright Jason Jenkins (www.flickr.com/jdub1980)

All other images copyright Frances VC Ryan

Thank you!

f.ryan@napier.ac.uk@cleverfrances

www.JustAPhD.com

Slides available at: www.slideshare.net/justfrances

© Frances Ryan