Thesis Final

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL
-1-
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
Technology has played an integral part of our daily lives. The fact that technology is becoming more readily available at a lower cost has given more options and alternatives for us to conduct our daily lives and activities. The invention of the computer and the introduction of the Internet have made our world borderless. Over the past decade, the communication uses of the Internet have become a very important part of young peoples lives. Communicating, sharing of ideas and information from around the world lies at the tip of our fingers. Almost anyone that has access to the Internet can communicate with anyone who also has the accessibility. There is no doubt that more and more teenagers are spending more of their time socializing and networking online. Teenagers and online social networking are becoming inseparable items in our world today Samsudin (2009).
Social networking is often seen as a grouping of individuals into specific groups similar to a small rural community or neighborhood. Now, social networking has a new twist with the intervention of technology online social networking was born. Social networking websites now functions as an online and virtual of Internet users from around the world. They are the latest online communication tool that allows users to create a public or semi-public profile, create and view their own, as well as other users online social networks, and interact with people in their networks.
The internet has provided an expansive environment that has the potential to offer instantaneous interaction with people worldwide. As a result, cyberspace has become a venue for leisure and educational activities of many youth, offering new opportunities to enrich and extend life experiences. However, along with these enhancements once unanticipated costs that can detrimentally affect the lives of young people.

Youth in todays world do not merely consume information from the diverse media sources that are accessible online. Young people are active agents who can manipulate, adapt, create and disseminate ideas and products through
-2-
communication technologies. As mobile phones, personal digital assistants (PDAs), laptops with wireless computing, digital cameras, and digital videos figure more prominently in the list of readily available tools that development of skills necessary for engagement in an environment that is not constrained by time or space. Within an interconnected environment, youth must struggle to assume a proactive role in exerting their voice and influence as they connect with others. These activities are driven not only by the technology, but also by the social context in which they exist.
Emerging technologies are designed to engage users in an active networked realm, thereby necessitating that technological competency include skills in communication and collaboration. This adds complexity to the demands of technology on the functioning of young people who must not only master the tasks required by the tools but must also simultaneously function part of a networked group as it shapes the social space in which it resides. The permeation of the Internet into the lives of children and youth can expose them to information with questionable legitimacy, ideas that can be contrary to positive behaviors, and messages that are intended to manipulate their actions or beliefs Berson (2003). Individual characteristics of young people can affect their readiness to participate in these social interactive experiences online Berson & Ferron (2002).
This prompted the researchers to make a two-fold investigation regarding the online disinhibition of teenagers together with their passive and active engagements. Suler (2004) defined online disinhibition as how people say and do things in cyberspace that they wouldnt ordinarily say and do in face-to-face world. They loosen up, feel less restrained and expressed themselves more openly. This disinhibition can work in seemingly opposing directions. Sometimes people share very personal things about themselves. They reveal secret emotions, fears and wishes. They show unusual act of kindness and generosity, sometimes going out of their way to help others. The researchers may call this thing benign disinhibition. However, the disinhibition is not always so salutary. They witness rude language,

harsh criticisms, anger, hatred, even threats. Or people visit the dark underworld of the Internet places of pornography, crime, and violence territory they would never explore in the real world. The researchers may call this toxic disinhibition.
-3-
One may surmise that the propensity of the researchers to study online disinhibition involved at least a set of factors. For some people, one or two of them produces the lions share of the disinhibition. In most cases, however, these factors intersect and interact with each other, supplement each other, resulting in a more complex, amplified effect.
Dissociative anonymity occurs when the person remains anonymous, it provides a sense of protection; within the framework of the Internet, this allows the user to move about without any kind of indication of identity or even distinguishing characteristics other than potentially a username. This kind of protection can provide a meaningful release for people in that they feel free to say things they might otherwise be embarrassed to, but by the same token, it also provides an outlet for behaviors that others might term antisocial or harmful;
Apparently, the Internet provides a shield to its users; often all one receives when interacting with another person on the Internet is a username or pseudonym that may or may not have anything to do with the real person behind the keyboard. This allows for misrepresentation of a person's true self; online a male can pose as a female and vice versa, for example. Additionally, the invisibility of the Internet prohibits people from reading standard social cues; small changes in facial expression, tone of voice, aversion of eyes, etc., all have specific connotations in normal face-to-face interaction; through this, a person may be engaged to invisibility.
Asynchronicity is quite evident that the asynchronous nature of the Internet can also affect a person's inhibitions. On internet message boards, conversations do not happen in real time; it could be as short as a few minutes to the next post but it could also be an extraordinarily long time as well. Because of this, it's easier for someone to "throw their opinions out" and then leave; a person can make a single post that might be considered very personal, emotionally charged, or inflammatory

and then "run away" by simply not logging in again. In this way, the person achieves catharsis by "voicing" their feelings, even if the audience is just invisible.
-4-
Solipsistic Introjection is lacking any kind of visual face-to-face cues; the human mind will assign characteristics and traits to a "person" in interactions on the internet. Reading another person's message may insert imagined images of what a person looks like or sounds like into the mind, and mentally assigns an identity to these things. The mind will associate traits to a user according to our own desires, needs, and wishes traits that the real person might not actually have.
By combining solipsistic introjection with the imagination, a feeling of escapism is produced commonly known as Dissociative Imagination a way to throw off mundane concerns to address a specific need without having to worry about consequences. Suler (2004) Finch's observation is about people see cyberspace as a kind of game where the normal rules of everyday interaction don't apply to them. Thus, the user is able to dissociate their online persona from the offline reality, effectively enabling that person to don that persona or shed it whenever they wish simply by logging on or off.
Minimizing Authority is a person's status may not be known to others and often, this lack of hierarchy causes changes in interactions with others. If people can't see the user, others have no way to know if the user is an on-duty police officer, head of state, or some kind of "ordinary" person hanging out in their den on their computer. Instead, things such as communication skill, quality of ideas, persistence, and technical ability determine one's status in cyberspace.
Therefore, the researchers think of the disinhibition effect as a person shifting to an "online" personality constellation that may be dissociated - in varying degrees, depending on the person - from the in-person constellation. Inhibiting guilt, shame, or anxiety may be features of the in-person self but not that online self. This constellations model also helps explain other online phenomena, like identity experimentation, role-playing fantasy games, multitasking projects, and other subtle shifts in personality expression as we move from one online environment to another. In fact, a single disinhibited "online self" probably does not exist at all, but rather a

collection of slightly different constellations of emotion, memory, and thinking that surface in and interact with different types of online environments. Different communication modalities enable different expressions of one. They allow us to see the different perspectives of that complex thing we call "identity."
-5-
It was further explained that in terms of online disinhibition, the researchers would want to look out students engaged on social online sites (SOS). They are within the schools vicinity coming from first year students to fourth year students. One could be prompted to ask why the researchers chose this study, its because the engagements exhibited by students would determine ones online standing virtually.
Engagement is the way of an individual to interact. Active engagement manifests the enthusiastic functioning of ones behavior on the virtual world. On the other hand, passive engagement shows the resigned behavior of a person towards another person.

1.2 Statement of the Problem
-6-
This study will determine the effects of Online Disinhibition on Passive and Active Engagements among Selected Pasay City Science High School Students.
Specifically, it will aim to answer the following question:
1. What is the Socio-demographic profile of the respondents in terms of: a. Name; b. Year and Section; c. Gender; d. Age and; e. Frequency of computer usage? 2. What are the factors affecting the disinhibition employed by the respondents? a. Dissociative anonymity; b. Asynchronicity; c. Solipsistic Introjection; d. Dissociative Imagination; e. Minimizing Authority? 3. What are the passive and active engagements performed by the respondents on social networking sites? 4. How do these engagements affect the performance of the students on social networking sites? 5. How does online disinhibition affect the engagements performed by the respondents?

1.3 Objectives
-7-
The researchers will determine the effects of Online Disinhibition on Passive and Active Engagements among Selected Pasay City Science High School Students.
Specifically, it will aspire to answer the following question:
1. To determine the Socio-demographic profile of the respondents in terms of: a. Name; b. Year and Section; c. Gender; d. Age and; e. Frequency of computer usage? 2. To identify the factors affecting the disinhibition employed by the respondents. a. Dissociative Anonymity; b. Asynchronicity; c. Solipsistic Introjection; d. Dissociative Imagination; e. Minimizing Authority? 3. To know the passive and active engagements performed by the respondents in social networking sites. 6. To determine how these engagements affect the performance of the students on social networking sites. 4. To know the effects of online disinhibition on passive and active engagements performed by the respondents.

1.4 Significance of the study
-8-
In the field of technology, new advancements concerning easy and faster communication through Internet has been established. Given the extensive researches and studies concerning the effects of Online Disinhibition on Passive and Active Engagement of Selected Students, there still remains a felt need to further examine their dynamics.
The researcher would like to provide new findings regarding the online disinhibition and passive and active engagements, its effects on individuals.
This study, though not exhaustive, is beneficial to the following:
For the students,
This study will provide information and deep understanding about online disinhibition through media specifically, the cyber world. The sharing of perspectives (thoughts, values, and feelings) online will benefit their communication skills. Their engagements on social networking sites will help them explore something new or make a change among themselves.
For the teachers,
This study will serve as a tool on their teaching strategies by creating ways on how to deal with the social online persona of their students. The teachers can also communicate concerns, establish rules and guidelines on good behavior of students.
For the parents,
This study will be beneficial to the parents because they are the ones who are responsible on their childrens actions online with the help of teen engagement and online disinhibition with online media. Parents will be more knowledgeable and engaged to being more understanding of his/her childs

online life. They will gain satisfaction from good relationships they establish with their children.
-9-
For the members of the academe,
This study will help them be provided with the necessary information about social networking sites the online disinhibition exhibited, different engagements established online (passive and active engagements) and its effects on ones online persona. It can also help them on finding ways to enhance the communication skills performed by the students in the environment of the academe.
For the future researchers,
This study will be able to produce an output which can really help them in having more information about their topic concerning cyber world: online persona of students. This will also serve as a good basis for the similar research they will conduct.

1.5. Theoretical Framework
- 10 -
This study will know the effects of Online Disinhibition on Passive and Active Engagements among Selected Pasay City Science High School Students.
The following were the brief previews of the theories that provided useful information about the study.
1.5.1
Structuration Theory
It defines structures as rules and resources organized s properties of social systems. The theory employs a recursive notion of actions constrained and enabled by structures which are produced and reproduced by that action.
Consequently, in this theory, technology is not rendered as an artifact, but instead examines how people, as they interact with a technology in their ongoing practices, enact structures which shape their emergent and situated use of that technology. (Orlikowski, 1992)
1.5.2
Social Presence Theory
It classifies different communication media along a one-dimensional continuum of social presence, where the degree of social presence is equated to the degree of awareness of the other person in a communication interaction. The faceto-face medium is considered to have the most social presence, whereas written text-based communication, the least. It is assumed in this theory that in any interaction involving two parties, both parties are concerned both with acting out certain roles and with developing or maintaining some sort of personal relationship.
1.5.3
Self-identity Theory
According to this theory, people form a social identity of values, attitudes and behavioral intentions from the ways they perceive and interpretation of

events and interactions. The social identity becomes more pronounced as the membership and inclusiveness increases.
- 11 -
Social identity theory is a diffuse but interrelated group of social psychological theories concerned with when and why individuals identify with, and behave as part of social groups, adopting shared attitudes. It is also concerned with what difference it makes when encounters between individuals are perceived as encounters between group members. Social identity theory is thus concerned both with the psychological and sociological aspects of group behavior.
1.5.4
Self Disclosure Theory
It
explains
why
personality
scales
predict
other
behavior,
performances and activities. Self disclosure can be assessed on an analysis of cost and rewards which can be further explained by social exchange theory. Most self disclosure usually occurs early in relationship development, but more intimate self disclosure occurs later. Self disclosure brings to mind earnest conversations about our deepest hopes and fears. But self disclosure is also about simply sharing our personal information. These can play an equally important role in performing relationships as those deep and meaningful conversations.
In explaining how people form strong relationships, psychologists along with other scientists - have long been interested in what personal information people reveal to each other. Through this, the researcher can use this theory to know how the Internet users reveal information about themselves.
Self-disclosure is not simply providing information to another person. Instead, scholars define self-disclosure as sharing information with others that they would not normally know or discover. Self-disclosure involves risk and vulnerability on the part of the person sharing the information. Self-disclosure performs several functions. It is a way of gaining information about another person. We want to be able to predict the thoughts and actions of people we know.

Self-disclosure is one way to learn about how another person thinks and feels. Once one person engages in self-disclosure, it is implied that the other person will also disclose personal information. This is known as the norm of reciprocity. Mutual disclosure deepens trust in the relationships and helps both people understand each other more. You also come to feel better about yourself and your relationship when the other person accepts what you tell them.
- 12 -
1.5.5 Deindividuation Theory
Deindividuation theory attempts to define abnormal behavior from the social dimension of the crowd. It is compelling while such is still emergent in its conception. How the individual comes to act in extraordinary manners in nonnormative instances has yet to be reconciled.
Deindividuation theory is a social psychological account of the individual in the crowd. Deindividuation is a psychological state of decreased selfevaluation, causing anti-normative and disinhibited behavior. The impact of deindividuation theory in science and society (especially 20th century politics) make it one of social science's more influential contributions. Deindividuation theory is rooted in some of the earliest social psychological theorizing, more than a century ago. It seeks to explain the apparent transformation of rational individuals into an unruly group or crowd. It posits that the group provides an environment, in which the individual - submerged and anonymous - suffers from a loss of self-awareness (Zimbardo, 1969). Deindividuation hinders reflection about the consequences of actions, rendering social norms impotent while increasing suggestibility to random outside influences. The theory has been invoked to account for a range of phenomena such as collective behavior, behavior in online groups and in CMC, and the results of the classic Stanford Prison Experience. Despite its status and impact, empirical support for deindividuation theory is minimal. Recently, this lack of support has been attributed to the faulty assumption that crowds cause a loss of self. Instead, it has been proposed that deindividuation marks a transition from individual identity to social dimensions of the self. This transition to a social identity may increase responsiveness to social norms particular to the crowd, instead of

decreasing responsiveness to generic social norms, as suggested by deindividuation theory.
- 13 -
According to deindividuation theory, the psychological state of deindividuation is aroused when individuals join crowds or large groups. The state is characterized by diminished awareness of self and individuality. This in turn reduces an individual's self-restraint and normative regulation of behavior. In social psychology, deindividuation is a major theory of group behavior. It provides an explanation of collective behavior of violent crowds, mindless hooligans, and the lynch mob. In addition, deindividuation has been associated with other social phenomena such as genocide, stereotyping, and disinhibition in other settings such as computer-mediated communication. Below, the theoretical evolution of
deindividuation is sketched, followed by a brief impression of the empirical support for this theory. Finally, recent research is discussed, which argues for a reconceptualization of deindividuation. It appears deindividuation is not a loss of individual identity, but may be better construed as a transition to a social identity.
1.5.6 Fuckwad Theory The psychologist John Suler calls it the online disinhibition effect, but Id rather call it what its supposed to be called: The Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory. In many ways, its true. Whatever normalizes the psyche breaks down because the sense of identity is not very well-articulated online. After all, its just text and images: the mode and method of articulation is limited to what can be used, and what is understood. In the words of Deleuze and Guattari: the paranoid body without - organs. In short, fuckwad. The Internet is like Nietzsches abyss: you look long enough into it, you become it. Cyberspace becomes the interpersonal Disneyland, so much so that personas, personalities, and avatars developed in it could become as real as real could be, even if theyre not real. It becomes a repository of things and relationships we find in physical society. It is true, what William Isaac Thomas said, that when people define their situations as real, they are real in their consequences.

On the one hand, the ability to create a virtual self (a persona) bypasses responsibilities and exigencies required of people in real world situations: there is no need to talk real-time, there is no need to be visible in the real world, and real - world cues and such need only be projected into online space. Yet those things that make dissociation possible and yes, even fun can highlight and underscore things that would be considered social ineptitude in the real world. Its like being Little Mister Internet, or Little Miss Internet; the fuckwad being made possible by that anonymity taking over ones personality.
- 14 -

1.6 Conceptual Framework
- 15 -
The study will examine two major variables - online disinhibition and engagements, specifically active and passive engagement among Selected Pasay City Science high School Students.
The researchers will test the online disinhibition present in the respondents. It will be measured through given questionnaires that will be answered by the respondents. This test will determine the factors affecting their online disinhibition and what type of engagement they possessed. Then, the researchers will elaborate the relationship involved as well as the possible effects perceived upon by the set of respondents.
The researchers will analyze the results after the tests have been conducted to know the effects of online disinhibition on the passive and active engagement of the respondents from their given answers and responses.
- 16 -
Social Networking
Engagements
Active Engagement
Passive Engagement
Online Disinhibition
Factors Affecting Online Disinhibition
Effects of Online Disinhibition on Online Engagement of Students
Figure 1 Conceptual Framework

1.7 Scope and Limitation
- 17 -
This study focused on the effects of online disinhibition on passive and active engagement among the selected Pasay City Science High School Students. Specifically, this study delved on how the effects of online disinhibition affect the motivation of the respondents online with respect in their passiveness and activeness in engagement.
Several limitations of the study create potential opportunities for new researchers to use different kinds of research in order to relate passive and active engagement in online disinhibition. The researchers came up with 60 respondents coming from all year levels. This study also utilized the purposive sampling technique that will be used in choosing the respondents of the study. The study covered the five months starting from September to February. Furthermore, the study discussed on the factors of online disinhibition that affect the passive and active engagements of the students.

1.8. Definition of Terms
- 18 -
The study will find out the effects of Online Disinhibition on Passive and Active Engagements among Selected Pasay City Science High School Students.
This study made use of terminologies that will be operationally and conceptually defined. These terms will be used within the context of the study.
Cyberspace is defined as the world of online and technological communication Disseminate is defined as spreading or scattering
Disinhibition connotes the manner or the way of an individual to isolate himself in real life but to pretend someone else online Diverse is defined as a variety or of different kinds or of characters
Engagement is defined as the way of an individual to interact with other individuals, may it be passively or actively Interconnected is defined as the relationships that exist between connected ideas
Leisure is defined as the time of enjoyment, relaxation or recreation
Netiquettes or Internet Etiquette connotes the behavior or manner of an individual regarding network communication Social Networking is a grouping of individuals sharing interests
Self-disclosure is defined as how an individual shares something about himself to other people.
- 19 -
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
This study will know the effects of Online Disinhibition on Passive and Active Engagements among Selected Pasay City Science High School Students. 2.1 Social Networking Sites
In the past five years, social networking websites have become increasingly popular among Internet users, especially young teens, as a place where they can meet other people, communicate, and exchange information.
Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, Flickr, are names familiar to a lot of people and quite often you hear about them on TV, or of course in the Internet. Some of the readers might be a member of one of these communities. Apparently some of these Social Network Websites (I will call them SNW from now on for convenience) are more and more quoted as new sources of happiness, depression, addiction, democracy, and new forms of social and political life.
Social networking sites typically allow users to create an online profile and establish a personal network to friends, family members, or other users of the site. Any computer with Internet access - and this includes just about any cell phone - can be used to join a social networking site. Some sites require only that the registrant provide an email address and often there is no system in place to verify the validity of any of the information that a registrant provides during the registration process including even the required email address. Most sites have terms of use meant to curb improper conduct, but enforcement of these terms of use is often limited and relies on self-reporting by other users to report violations.
The internet has provided an expansive environment that has the potential to offer instantaneous interaction with people worldwide. As a result, cyberspace has

become a venue for leisure and educational activities of many youth, offering new opportunities to enrich and extend life experiences. However, along with these enhancements once unanticipated costs that can detrimentally affect the lives of young people. Youth in todays world do not merely consume information from the diverse media sources that are accessible online. Young people are active agents who can manipulate, adapt, create and disseminate ideas and products through
- 20 -
communication technologies. As mobile phones, personal digital assistants (PDAs), laptops with wireless computing, digital cameras, and digital videos figure more prominently in the list of readily available tools that development of skills necessary for engagement in an environment that is not constrained by time or space. Within an interconnected environment, youth must struggle to assume a proactive role in exerting their voice and influence as they connect with others. These activities are driven not only by the technology, but also by the social context in which they exist.
Emerging technologies are designed to engage users in an active networked realm, thereby necessitating that technological competency include skills in communication and collaboration. This adds complexity to the demands of technology on the functioning of young people who must not only master the tasks required by the tools but must also simultaneously function part of a networked group as it shapes the social space in which it resides. The permeation of the Internet into the lives of children and youth can expose them to information with questionable legitimacy, ideas that can be contrary to positive behaviors, and messages that are intended to manipulate their actions or beliefs (Berson, 2003). Individual characteristics of young people can affect their readiness to participate in these social interactive experiences online (Berson & Ferron, 2002).
Young people are often equipped with powerful technology that communicates through an enticing amalgamation of images, words and sounds. However, multiple sensory inputs are demanding on cognitive resources and can overwhelm childrens capacity to engage in thoughtful decision making (Andersen, 2002). As the digital environment continues to bombard the senses with rapid transmission of complex messages, the dazzle of cyberspace and wired communication can interfere with

reasoned choice, placing young people in a state of imbalance for recognizing risk or responding to threats. The resulting overload can reduce the ability of youth to make sense of what is presented or to respond in a judicious manner (Berson, 2003b).
- 21 -
The Internet is accessible and popular among youth, and evidence is suggesting that people often make online choices that are contrary to their real-world behaviors (Miller, 1999). This phenomenon has broadened the opportunity to engage in violent and abusive behaviors and has dramatically increased the access of potential offenders to a more expansive pool of victims (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2002).
Research has revealed that the Internet is not strictly an intellectual activity, but rather it has behavioral repercussions and emotional implications (Berson et al., 2002). Although the Internet is increasingly a point of social contact for adolescents who may prefer the perceived anonymity of Internet relationships, electronic communication also has been used to bully, harass, threaten, and exploit victims. As young people spend increased amounts of time online, there is increased risk for exposure to violence and/or exploitation (Cole et al.,2001). 2.2 Online Disinhibition
The phenomena was first noticed during the mid eighties by psychologists studying verbal behavior in e-mailing (Sproull & Kiesler, 1986), bulletin boards and Multi-User Dimensions (MUDs) - collectively known as Computer Mediated Communication or CMC (see Siegel, Dubrovsky, Kiesler & McGuire (1986) for a particularly good example of these early studies).
Under normal, face-to-face social conditions, conversation is governed by a myriad of quite stringent social norms and rules - people are, for the most part, kind and considerate in their interactions with others, heated conflict is unusual and hateful verbal abuse is very rare indeed. However, CMC users appear to follow different rules or, as some have argued, no rules at all. An issue that would have caused only minor disagreement face-to-face may often result in things getting out of

hand in CMC as communication degenerated into hostile word-slinging. Indeed the behavior is so common that it has been given a name - 'flaming'.
- 22 -
The JennyMUSH discussion group, a self-help web site for victims of abuse, is used by Reid (1998) to provide a particularly vivid example of Internet disinhibition. On the JennyMUSH site, a user took advantage of the system to transform him-/herself into a 'virtual manifestation of every other user's fears'. Changing their gender to male and name to 'Daddy' the user was able to send messages describing 'virtual assaults in graphic and violent terms' to all others logged on to the site at the time. Some of the victims of this attack logged off but others moved to the same virtual location as the attacker and pleaded with him to stop. Eventually a Wizard arrived to find the remaining users being 'obscenely taunted' by the attacker.
Taking matters into his own hands the wizard took away the attacker's ability to communicate, changed his name to 'Vermin' and in the description field that accompanies each user on-line wrote, "This is the lowest scum, the most pathetic dismal object which a human being can become." Despite the awful nature of what had happened, the worst was yet to come. With their attacker effectively bound and gagged the remaining JennyMUSH users took "dreadful virtual revenge." "They described all the most violent punishments they would like to enact on this and all other attackers, emoting all the hatred and rage that JennyMUSH had been established to help people come to terms with" (Reid, 1998). The shocking behavior of not only the instigator but the victims of this hateful display has, been attributed to the disinhibiting effect of CMC.
As well as the cases of anti-social disinhibited behavior, psychologists also observed a more pro-social effect. People appeared more open when using CMC. Intimate friendships were formed quickly and easily over what was thought to be a relatively restricted means of communication. Indeed, people were friendly to a fault. Where someone might talk self-consciously with a stranger face-to-face, being protective and careful about giving away personal details, meetings with strangers on CMC were less awkward and resulted in the divulgence of an alarming amount of sensitive, personal and potentially dangerous information.

There is, today, no shortage of evidence that CMC is associated with apparently disinhibited behavior and there is a growing body of evidence that even browsing behavior is subject to disinhibition. In short, it has been found that on the Internet people say what they would not normally say, do what they would not normally do, and perhaps even go, at the click of a button, where they would not normally go. The definition of exactly what constitutes disinhibited behavior is somewhat contentious however. In the literature, particularly in that which deals with CMC specifically, disinhibition is often simply defined as flaming. Though the study of flaming behavior in CMC is important in it's own right, defining disinhibition as flaming ignores the potentially more interesting and informative issues surrounding that broader group of behaviors characterised by disinhibition. If flaming, excessive disclosure and disinhibited browsing behavior are associated then it would be of benefit to psychologists to study these collectively. Similar problems occur with definitions that incorporate the idea of 'anonymity' a priori into the concept of disinhibition - there is evidence that not all disinhibited behaviour is under strictly anonymous conditions (see section on psychological explanations, below).
- 23 -
According to Joinson (1998), "Disinhibition on the Internet is any behaviour that is characterised by an apparent reduction in concerns for self-presentation and judgement of others". Joinson's definition is broad enough to encompass all of the types of disinhibited behavior discussed so far, but it also gives a clear idea of the sort of behavior we are looking for. Furthermore, his deliberate use of the word 'apparent' makes this definition neutral with respect to theory. A theory neutral definition is preferable when we discuss possible causes of disinhibition on the Internet later. For these reasons, unless explicitly stated, Joinson's definition of disinhibition will be used henceforth.
When people are online, they loosen up, feel less inhibited and are able to express themselves through other types of communication. They dont feel the same kinds of social pressures that lead people to conform to various social norms (like politeness) that are common in face-to-face social relationships. John Suler, a psychology professor at Rider University, calls this the Online Disinhibition Effect (ODE). Based on psychological theory, ODE is a phenomenon where people behave

with less restraint online than offline. Six components work together to create ODE. For some people, one component may be stronger than another. The factors are: You Dont Know Me: its difficult to tell who someone really is. As you move
- 24 -
1.
around the internet, most of the people you encounter can't easily tell who you are. System operators and some technologically savvy, motivated users may be able to detect your e-mail or internet address, but for the most part people only know what you tell them about yourself. If you wish, you can keep your identity hidden. As the word "anonymous" indicates, you can have no name - at least not your real name. That anonymity works wonders for the disinhibition effect. When people have the opportunity to separate their actions from their real world and identity, they feel less vulnerable about opening up. Whatever they say or do can't be directly linked to the rest of their lives. They don't have to own their behavior by acknowledging it within the full context of who they "really" are. When acting out hostile feelings, the person doesn't have to take responsibility for those actions. In fact, people might even convince themselves that those behaviors "aren't me at all." In psychology this is called "dissociation." You Cant See Me: People are invisible online; they can lurk or move from
2.
page to page without others knowing theyre there. In many online environments other people cannot see you. As you browse through web sites, message boards, and even some chat rooms, people may not even know you are there at all - with the possible exception of web masters and other users who have access to software tools that can detect traffic through the site, assuming they have the inclination to keep an eye on you, one of maybe hundreds or thousands of users. Invisibility gives people the courage to go places and do things that they otherwise wouldn't. See You Later: Some online communication is asynchronous (it doent always
3.
happens in real time). In e-mail and message boards they are delays in feedback, which can open people up to express themselves with disinhibition since they know they wont have to deal with instant feedback from others. In e-mail and message boards, communication is asynchronous. People don't interact with each other in real time. Others may take minutes, hours, days, or even months to reply to

something you say. Not having to deal with someone's immediate reaction can be disinhibiting. In real life, it would be like saying something to someone, magically suspending time before that person can reply, and then returning to the conversation when you're willing and able to hear the response. Immediate, realtime feedback from others tends to have a very powerful effect on the ongoing flow of how much people reveal about themselves. In e-mail and message boards, where there are delays in that feedback, people's train of thought may progress more steadily and quickly towards deeper expressions of what they are thinking and feeling. Some people may even experience asynchronicous communication as "running away" after posting a message that is personal, emotional, or hostile. It feels safe putting it "out there" where it can be left behind. Its All in My Head: Because online communication is missing nonverbal cues
- 25 -
4.
that you would see in face-to-face communication, we create the voice, tone, personality and image of another person based on what he or she writes (and maybe through photos or videos). Our imaginations can get carried away with who other people are and what they mean. We might jump to conclusions and treat them differently than we would if we were in a face-to-face situation. The online companion now becomes a character within our intrapsychic world, a character that is shaped partly by how the person actually presents him or herself via text communication, but also by our expectations, wishes, and needs. Because the person may even remind us of other people we know, we fill in the image of that character with memories of those other acquaintances. As the character now becomes more elaborate and "real" within our minds, we may start to think, perhaps without being fully aware of it, that the typed-text conversation is all taking place within our heads, as if it's a dialogue between us and this character in our imagination - even as if we are authors typing out a play or a novel. Actually, even when it doesn't involve online relationships, many people carry on these kinds of conversations in their imagination throughout the day. People fantasize about flirting, arguing with a boss, or very honestly confronting a friend about what they feel. In their imagination, where it's safe, people feel free to say and do all sorts of things that they wouldn't in reality. At that moment, reality IS one's imagination. Online text communication can become the psychological tapestry in which a person's mind weaves these fantasy role plays, usually unconsciously and with considerable disinhibition.

5. Its Just a Game: Some people see their online life as a kind of game with different rules than in real life. This can happen through the portrayal of identity, communication with others or through role-playing games. If we combine solipsistic introjection with the escapability of cyberspace, we get a slightly different force that magnifies disinhibition. People may feel that the imaginary characters they created exist in a different space, that one's online persona along with the online others live in an make-believe dimension, separate and apart from the demands and responsibilities of the real world. They split or dissociate online fiction from offline fact. Emily Finch, an author and criminal lawyer studying identity theft in cyberspace, has suggested that some people see their online life as a kind of game with rules and norms that don't apply to everyday living (pers. comm., 2002). Once they turn off the computer and return to their daily routine, they believe they can leave that game and their game-identity behind. Why should they be held responsible for what happens in that make-believe play world that has nothing to do with reality? After all, it isn't that different than blasting away at your pals in a shoot-em up video game... or so some people might think, perhaps unconsciously. Were equals: Because everyone on the Internet has an equal opportunity to
- 26 -
5.
share his or her voice and participate, everyone seems to start on the same playing field. In real life, people adhere to different norms of conformity to authority and restrain their behavior to fit these norms. However, in online life, the concept of authority is diminished so that people are more willing to misbehave.
While online a person's status in the in-person world may not be known to others and it may not have as much impact as it does in the in-person world. If people can't see you or your surroundings, they don't know if you are the president of a major corporation sitting in your expensive office, or some ordinary person lounging around at home in front of the computer. Even if people do know something about your offline status and power, that elevated position may have little bearing on your online presence and influence. In most cases, everyone on the internet has an equal opportunity to voice him or herself. Everyone - regardless of status, wealth, race, gender, etc. - starts off on a level playing field. Although one's status in the outside world ultimately may have some impact on one's powers in cyberspace, what mostly determines your influence on others is your skill in communicating (including

writing skills), your persistence, the quality of your ideas, and your technical knowhow.
- 27 -
People are reluctant to say what they really think as they stand before an authority figure. A fear of disapproval and punishment from on high dampens the spirit. But online, in what feels like a peer relationship - with the appearances of authority minimized - people are much more willing to speak out or misbehave. These psychological factors work together to contribute to peoples feelings of disinhibition online.
Identity deception is an inherent part of online communication (Turkle, 1995), and transformations can have positive and negative repercussions for youth who also experiment with self-constructed and fluid identity online (Gurak, 2001; McKenna & Bargh, 2000; OConnell, 2001). The deindividuation that occurs online is associated with a tendency to diminish self-regulation and to engage in disinhibited behavior (Joinson, 1998). There is an increased likelihood of nonconforming or aggressive interaction, but there is also a tendency to share more intimate disclosures (McKenna & Bargh, 2000).
The lack of affective feedback and remoteness from the impact of harm, the reduced fear of punishment, the disregard of existing rules in the new context of cyberspace, and the perception of pervasive corruption online contribute to poor decision making (Willard, 2003).
Furthermore,
continuously
accessible
environments
with
wireless
technologies, handheld computers, and mobile phones provide growing temptations for misuse, including cheating, plagiarism, and bullying with digital devices.
Computer-mediated discussion boards have been suggested to be able to overcome several of the shortcomings: First of all, and as has been discussed extensively (Kiesler, Siegel & McGuire, 1984), a great deal of the non-verbal cues that are present in face-to-face communication (F2F) are lacking in distributed CMC. Since this non-verbal cues are, among others, used to assess social status,

computer-mediated communication has the potential of being more democratic (Herring, 2004).
- 28 -
Most of the studies that compare F2F with on-line discussion formats have focused on textbased discussion environments that occur in a-synchronous, distributed, distant communication modes (such as in the framework of e-courses, homework assignments, and after-school social communication). In this study we will focus on the blending of synchronous, text based discussion tools within co-located classroom settings, a topic that has, thus far, rarely been the focus of research (Cuban, 2002). The use of on-line communication in co-located settings may combine some of the advantages of online communication, without some of the potentially problematic aspects of distant, anonymous communication formats in educational settings: On the one hand, its textual nature, lack of non-verbal cues, persistence of contributions and simultaneous nature may encourage reflection, explicitness, interactivity and participation. On the other, student discussants share a physical space, they personally know their discussion partners and the teacher is physically present. This could avoid some of the negative sides of distant, anonymous CMC in secondary education settings, such as teacher difficulty to verify whether a certain task is actually completed by the student or not, instances of flaming and other social disturbances, and lack of accountability for communication content. Another difference with the above-mentioned studies and the present one concerns the fact that the former have mainly focused on objective rates and aspects of communication and have not explored how these different communication formats are perceived and experienced by the students using them.
Moreover, the increased anonymity of online communication is thought to cause people to become less inhibited and to self-disclose more frequently (Suler, 2004). This decrease of authority, social status and inhibitions incombination with the lack of need to compete for speaking rights may thus promote free expression of individual stand points and increased and equalitarian participation by all discussants. In addition, the textual medium of communication, the ability to re-read and re-vise contributions, and the fact that in a- synchronous CNC there is an increase in the amount of time available to think and consider ones response before posting it, are all thought to encourage reflection (Guiller, Durndell, & Ross, 2008;

Kim, Anderson, Nguyen-Yahiel, & Archodidou, 2007). Others have argued not even though F2F discussion modes may be particularly suitable for the creation of new ideas and for brainstorming, a-synchronous CNC promote explicitness in communication and increase the rate of substantive and reasoned contributions (Kim et. Al, 2007; Newman, Webb, & Cochrane, 1995). This, in turn, may have been the result of increased opportunities for reflection and the need to be more explicit in light of the lack of non-verbal cues.
- 29 -
Increased disinhibition online is thought to be one of the side effects of computer-mediated communication that is, communication between ourselves and a computer. Adam Joinson discusses disinhibition online in a book chapter entitled, Disinhibited Internet Behavior: Causes and Implications (2007): Thus, if inhibition is when behavior is contrained or restrained through selfconsciousness, anxiety about social situations, worries about public evaluation , and so on, then disinhibition can be characterized by an absence or reversal of these same factors. Indeed, Prentice-Dunn and Rogers (1982) see disinhibition as a product of reduced public self-awareness, which should lead to less concern about the judgment of others. With regard to an individuals behavior on the Internet, disinhibition could be summarized as behavior that is less inhibited than comparative behavior in real life.
Thus disinhibition on the Internet is not defined as flaming or hostile communication, but rather is seen as any behavior that is characterized by an apparent reduction in concerns for self-presentation and the judgment of others.
The core concept of the online disinhibition effect refers to a loosening (or complete abandonment) of social restrictions and inhibitions that would otherwise be present in normal face-to-face interaction during interactions with others on the Internet.
Because of the loss of inhibition, some users may exhibit benign tendencies; people may become more affectionate, more willing to open up to others, less guarded about their emotions and may speak to others about what they are feeling in

an attempt to achieve emotional catharsis. According to Suler, this particular occurrence is called benign disinhibition.
- 30 -
With respect to bad behavior, users on the Internet can frequently do or say as they wish without fear of any kind of meaningful reprisal in most Internet forums, the worst kind of punishment one can receive for bad behavior is usually being banned from a particular site. In practice, however, this serves little use; the person involved can usually circumvent the ban by simply registering another username and continuing the same behavior as before. Suler calls this toxic disinhibition. Suler names six primary factors behind why people sometimes act radically different on the internet than when they do in normal face-to-face situations.
A whole new vocabulary has grown from the cyber world and the blogger, terms such as dissociative anonymity (You dont know me); solipsisticintrojection (Its all in my head); and dissociative imagination (Its just a game) are all part of what is known as a digital identity.
These behaviors exhibited by bloggers are online disinhibition behaviors and are directly related to the fact that the user is in cyber space. A Wall Street Journal article on the subject describes disinhibition as what the world would look like if everyone behaved like Jerry Lewis or Paris Hilton or we all lived in South Park. In other words a lack of inhibitions.
An article by John Suler's The Psychology of Cyberspace details all of these behaviors as well as others related to communicating in cyber space. It differentiates disinhibition as toxic or benign. Benign is simply an open exploration of ones self in a non harmful manner to the public. But toxic disinhibition has a negative affect on society and is described in the article as rude language and harsh criticisms, anger, hatred, even threats. Or people explore the dark underworld of the internet, places of pornography and violence, places they would never visit in the real world.
An
example
of
toxic
disinhibited
behavior
would
be
disinhibited
vocabulary. As noted above, rude language or harsh criticisms are becoming the norm in places it was never expected to be found. Places like the Daily Kos, an

influential blogging site in Democratic politics. It is commonly found on television shows such as The Sopranos or stand up comedy routines. And much of the popular music is a clearly exhibiting disinhibited vocabulary in its songs. 2.3 Implications of Internet Disinhibition
- 31 -
What, if anything, are the implications of disinhibited behaviour on the Internet? Should we be concerned by it, or is it just an interesting but essentially unimportant by-product of the information-super-highway?
Certainly, disinhibition on the Internet need not always be construed as bad. It can be enormously beneficial - the lonely can make new friends, the meek can speak their mind, the shy can explore new identities, and the embarrassed or ashamed can seek counsel. One American survey showed that teenagers felt the Internet freed them up to be their true selves (Lenhart et al., 2001). Korean web-site designers capitalised on the liberating quality of CMC by opening up a 'swear room' where people could flame each other to let off steam (Yoon, 2001). Health organizations, as well, are beginning to realize the benefits of people's increased propensity to seek or divulge potentially embarrassing or threatening medical information online. Unfortunately however, the effects of disinhibited behavior on the Internet are not always desirable. The following is a synopsis of some of the potential negative implications of disinhibition on the Internet:
Flaming - The characteristics of flaming behavior have already been discussed and there can be no doubt that at least some of the time this behavior has a negative impact on child and adult victims alike. The old adage 'Sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me' could never have been more inappropriate than on the Internet. Predation - The results of a NZ on-line survey of adolescent girls on the net suggest that the sort of behavior the Internet can generate is alarmingly dangerous. 'Girls on the Net', as the survey was called, found that: 35.5% of those surveyed had given out personal information over the net; 26.5% had sent a photo of themselves to someone on the Net; 33.5% had met someone face to face that they had met online;

32% went to that meeting alone; 22.5% had felt unsafe or threatened while using the Internet (most commonly sexual threats). These are disturbing results, and even more disturbing is that they are relatively conservative. Whether the direct result of a disinhibitory effect or not, such figures are part of growing evidence that predation on the internet presents a real risk to youth. Most predators operate via CMC, grooming unsuspecting children into a face-to-face meeting. In this context, disinhibition may be something of a double-edged sword. Not only could it increase the risk of children divulging information and agreeing to more than they otherwise would, but it may also impact on the behavior of potential predators. It is not hard to visualize a deviant who enjoys just talking to children over CMC progressing to 'predator' status by arranging meetings under the disinhibiting influence of CMC. For better or for worse, the Internet's potential to facilitate deviant behavior is becoming increasingly well known. In 1997 a Welsh man was accused of numerous acts of child abuse. His defense argued that the Internet acted as a catalyst (in Joinson, 1998). Illegal or Undesirable material - There is no doubt that the internet enables users to access illegal or undesirable material that they would not otherwise be able to access, but does it do something more? If the Internet causes disinhibition, then people will be more likely to actually act on a desire to procure illegal or undesirable material online. Just as disinhibition on the information super-highway can make seeking medical information easy as well as appealing (Joinson, 1998), so too may it 'encourage' those who seek everything from an illegal copy of this weeks hit single to illicit pornography. Online recruitment - Another risk that has been identified in association with Internet disinhibition is an increased susceptibility to online recruitment by gangs and cults. As with illegal and undesirable material, the effect of the Internet may be two pronged. Not only does it increase the likelihood of exposure, but also the chances of acting on any, otherwise latent, desires.
- 32 -
This may help people to realize their 'true identity' - for instance the Internet has proven enormously helpful to people struggling with their sexual identity. On the flip side though, an increased likelihood of subscribing to the KKK, pro-anorexia sites, religious cults or paedophile rings can only be negative. Gaunt (pers. omm..) points

out a salient example in the Heaven's Gate cult, a religious group that recruited members on the Internet, all of who committed suicide in 1997. Though the effects of disinhibition in this area are potentially dramatic, research is sadly lacking. Impact on the perpetrator - An important area of study that has received little attention to date is the psychological effect of disinhibited behaviour on the individual exhibiting the behaviour (Gaunt, pers. comm.). Justifiably, much has been made of the devastating effects of disinhibited behaviour (esp. flaming) on its victims, but relatively little research looks at the effects on the perpetrator. In the real world most of us have done or said something that we later regretted, so perhaps, that the phenomenon occurs online should not be of concern. Unlike in real-life though, on the Internet everything said and done is recorded (potentially on thousands of computers worldwide) and can be used against people verbatim, indefinitely. In CMC this is made all the more distasteful by the fact that most, if not all communication is text based. What you say and what you have said ARE who you are online. Because of this people find it very difficult to take back what they have said, preferring instead to vehemently defend a statement, even if it is not a true representation of their thoughts and feelings (Reid, 1998). When the very nature of the medium is disinhibiting as well, this makes for a fragile cyber-community indeed. Lin & Chin-Chung (2000) found that those people who have become dependent on the Internet scored higher on overall sensation seeking and disinhibition than nondependents. This means that the very people who rely on the internet for social support and friendship are the ones who are likely to have it all come crashing down around them, and are unlikely to have a 'real-world' social support network to kick in when things get tough. As the JennyMUSH example illustrated, the retribution sought by victims of flaming can be as tough as, if not tougher than, the crime itself. 'Victims' also have the power to completely ostracise the perpetrator in their MUD and potentially exclude them from other MUD's by passing on user details. Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your point of view, the same anonymity that may encourage disinhibited behaviour also serves to protect the perpetrator from real-life persecution and allows him the option of creating a new online character to replace the banished one. Whilst an individual's cyber-characters are theoretically replaceable, the same cannot be said for their real-life persona, which may be permanently damaged by
- 33 -

such incidents. Not surprisingly, ostracism and rejection by one's cyber-peers has been found to negatively affect self-esteem and physiological and psychological health (Williams, Cheung and Choi, 2000). Putting aside the impact of rejection by one's supposed friends for a single moment of indiscretion, one must ask what is the impact of the behaviour itself on the individual's self-perception. From CMC flaming to unsolicited hate mail, from downloading illegal software to frequenting the seedy cyber-underworld, what is the impact of disinhibited behaviour on the disinhibited? As Joinson (1998) points out, according to Bem's (1972) self-perception theory, people conceptualise themselves and their attitudes by observing their own behaviours. If an individual is repeatedly acting in a disinhibited way on the net, they may infer that this sort of behaviour is who they are. This may be a traumatic inference to make if the behaviour is particularly distasteful. What is more, there is the potential that, having formed a negative self-perception, the behaviour will diffuse into daily life (Gaunt, pers.com.). The Lin & Chin Chung study found that people who have become dependent on the Internet scored higher on overall sensation seeking and disinhibition than non-dependents. This shows at least a correlation between dependent Internet use and disinhibited behaviour in other aspects of one's life. More research is needed into whether there is a causative relationship between Internet use and disinhibition in other areas but the results certainly suggest a possibility.
- 34 -
Given that disinhibition on the Internet is a potential problem, what can we do about it? The first step towards preventing dangerous or undesirable disinhibited behaviour is to attempt to explain it. Armed with a powerful explanation of what might be happening we can construct informative, theory driven research and develop interventions where necessary.
Most theories focus on the role of anonymity in fostering disinhibition and indeed the two ideas have long been linked in psychology. In 1895, Le Bon incorporated both into his 'Study of the popular mind' (Joinson, 1998) and, more recently, we can see the link in applications of Social Identity Theory and Deindividuation Theory (Prentice-Dunn and Rogers, 1982) in explaining disinhibited crowd behaviour. Although largely focused on explaining group level phenomena, the ideas behind the two theories are still applicable to disinhibition on the Internet.

Both claim disinhibited behavior results from a reduction in accountability (e.g. anonymity reduces concern for the public consequences of the behavior) and a shift in attention from the private or personal level to the public or social level (reducing the salience of internal standards and self-regulation). Though these theories are appealing because of the substantial body of research behind them, there is evidence that they are inadequate as an explanation of disinhibition on the Internet.
- 35 -
Firstly, they predict that behavior, like flaming, by anonymous users will not be governed by any norms. As is claimed by Postmed, Spears and Lea (2000) proceeding their investigation into group norms in CMC, this is clearly not the case.
''Results show that norms prescribing a particular use of technology are socially constructed over time at the level of locally defined groups and also show that the influence of these norms is limited to the boundaries of the group. It is concluded that the process of social construction is restrained by social identities that become salient over the course of interaction via CMC. These findings complement experimental evidence that stresses the importance of normative influence in CMC.''
Secondly, these theories imply that anonymity is of prime importance in the development of disinhibited behaviour. However, Siegal's study mentioned earlier, and others like it, have shown that the effect of anonymity is small when compared to the effect of the communication medium.
Another group of theories that have been applied to explaining disinhibition on the Internet are those that focus on the nature of the communication medium itself. Not surprisingly, there is evidence that understanding of each other (Straus & McGrath, 1994) and of group decisions (Adrianson & Hjelmquist, 1991) is poorer in CMC than face-to-face. The narrow bandwidth of CMC and e-mail is thought to lead to depersonalisation through reduced 'social presence' and to misunderstandings, disagreements and frustration because of reduced social cues and the limited amount of information that can be conveyed in any given time.
Band-width arguments can explain hostile behaviour relatively easily, however, they have more difficulty explaining things like excessive self-disclosure

and intimate Internet based friendships. One argument is that precisely because of the limited amount of information available, users reveal personal information in an effort to compensate. It is, as yet, a moot point as to whether the sort of disclosure seen in CMC is beyond mere compensation.
- 36 -
2.4 Engagements
Here are some of the levels of engagements done on the Internet:
A. Mindless Chatter: This is basically saying whatever comes to your mind and sometimes you might get a reply (the other person may also be bored, right?) and you might think there is engagement. B. Inconsequential Topics: These are like ice-breakers. After you break the ice, you have to move on but many people are happy to continue those conversations forever and think they are engaged. C. Genuine, Caring and Thoughtful Conversations: You are genuine, caring and thoughtful about those topics you are discussing. That comes across and this is like the entry point to getting the other person engaged at a higher level. When I say this is an entry ticket, it means there is more work to be done. Its not over. D. Immediate Relevance: From here on, you always include the previous section starting from C (Genuine, Caring and Thoughtful) as a given. You talk about things that are of immediate relevance to the other person. So you become a positive possibility for the other person right NOW. E. Future Relevance: You start engaging in conversations that are of immediate and future relevance to the other person. You show that you are a positive possibility for the other person now and in the future. F. Who You Are: This is where your personal brand kicks in. You not only show that you are a positive possibility in the immediate and future concerns of the other person in your conversations but also by showing who you are. The other person will make an assessment on the level of engagement based on both what you are saying and who you are.

2.5 Synthesis of the Study
- 37 -
In summary, modern technologies require young people to make sense of an overload of information. Despite the amplification of the quantity of data available, the nature of the sensory input restricts and often distorts the quality of visual and tactile cues, the primary modalities used by the brain to represent experience. Filled with superfluous data, virtual interactions provide limited access to the critical signals needed to differentiate safety from harm.
Moreover, without the biological structure necessary for deliberate and thoughtful action, young people may impulsively act and react in cyberspace without forethought to the influence of powerful sensations and may be easily lured by the artificial distinctions between virtual encounters and real-life activity.
Not only for the young people, are adults also formidable to this kind of informalities when it comes to cyberspace actions. If young people lose their sensitivity and proper intuition on reality, adults with corrupted minds may abuse and take advantage of this phenomenon that is currently diffusing now. For the internet is open for all the people around the world, it opens more opportunities and more risks as well. Personal thoughts are disfigured through its exposure to this safer/more dangerous world. Communication is very effortless, not only for an individual to the world but also vice-versa. Talking to someone abroad was never this easy and reaching relatives is effortless. But too much revelation may cause to an identity theft that are popularly performed by hackers who may disrupt ones personal information.
In general, increased disinhibition online is thought to be one of the side effects of computer-mediated communication that is, communication between ourselves and a computer. Thus, if inhibition is when behavior is constrained or restrained through selfconsciousness, anxiety about social situations, worries about public evaluation , and so on, then disinhibition can be characterized by an absence or reversal of these same factors. Indeed, Prentice-Dunn and Rogers (1982) see disinhibition as a product of reduced public self-awareness, which should lead to less concern about

the judgment of others. With regard to an individuals behavior on the Internet, disinhibition could be summarized as behavior that is less inhibited than comparative behavior in real life.
- 38 -
Thus disinhibition on the Internet is not defined as flaming or hostile communication, but rather is seen as any behavior that is characterized by an apparent reduction in concerns for self-presentation and the judgment of others.
In engagements, majorly in students, Chatrooms, Discussion Boards, MOOs (Multiple Object-Oriented Environments), BLOGS, etc., have become core elements of many online courses. Many educators consider such elements the answer to past criticism that online education lacked student interaction. Yet it is important to determine what types of interaction can take place in these synchronous and asynchronous environments and to establish a variety of interactions, so that all students are able to speak, listen, and be heard. Structure a range of possible communication interactions that enhance your curriculum and meet students scheduling and learning needs as individuals and as a whole: Bulletin boards for more in-depth discussions of readings; small group chats to brainstorm topic ideas or virtual debates among smaller groups of students; virtual office hours in real-time. Archive conversations to allow for further reflection and follow-up. Also allow for noncomputer interactions, including telephone time, fax, and in some cases, face-to-face meetings among students and between instructor and students.
- 39 -
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents a brief discussion of the research design, population and validation, instruments used, the process followed for the data gathering, data processing, and statistical treatment for the data analysis of this study. 3.1 Research Design
Descriptive method of research was used in this study. A descriptive method of research is a fact-finding study in which it studies the variables pertinent to a specific situation. This study is concerned with studying the relationship of the variable presenting the study. The study is concerned with determining the effects of online disinhibition on passive and active engagements among selected Pasay City Science High School students. 3.2 Samples, Sample Size, Sampling Design
The researcher focused on the study of online disinhibition: Its effects on passive and active engagements of Pasay City Science High School students. The whole number of the Pasay City Science High School Students was the population of the study. The researcher obtained sixty (60) members of the population.
Purposive sampling technique is a non-probability, which starts with a purpose in mind, and the sample is thus selected to include people of interest.
The sampling technique was suitable for the study because only a few was chosen to be the sample because the samples need to pass the criteria frequent blogger and variation of real-life persona. When the sample was taken, the researchers rejected people who did not fit a particular profile for the study.

3.3 Data Collection Instrument The researcher used the research conducted questionnaire. A four-part questionnaire was developed which were categorized into the factors of online disinhibition, online engagements active and passive engagements, real-life engagements active and passive engagements and effects of online disinhibition on active and passive engagements.
- 40 -
The respondents were given four columns namely: strongly agree/always, agree/sometimes, disagree/seldom and strongly disagree/never. They were asked to put a check on only one of the four columns regarding their perception about the given statement. 3.4 Data Collection Procedure
The researcher had personally distributed the questionnaire to the respondents. One-shot survey was conducted among the respondents after answering the given questions. The respondents were gathered according to their year level in an isolated classroom. Then, they were given instructions regarding how to answer the questionnaire. The researchers further explained the content of the questionnaires and why they were selected as the respondents, based on the criteria. The questionnaire was floated on December. In addition, during the
reclaiming of the questionnaires, there was a hundred percent retrieval rate for the questionnaires. All of the respondents have abided on the instructions given unto them.
3.5
Statistical Treatment of Data
The data gathered from the questionnaire will be analyzed and interpreted through the computation of the following:

3.5.1 Weighted Mean
- 41 -
Since the study will utilize qualitative and quantitative data, the researcher used this formula in finding the weighted mean. The formula in finding the weighted mean is: Weighted mean = wx
In order to interpret the computed mean, the researcher will use the following intervals:
Legend Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
Interpretation 3.25 4.00 2.50 3.24 1.75 2.49 1.00 1.74
- 42 -
Chapter 4
Results and Discussion
This chapter presents analyzes and interprets the data which were gathered to respond systematically to the identified objects of the study. It is divided into the following areas of concerned namely, the socio-demographic profile of the respondents, factors affecting the online disinhibition, passive and active engagements of the respondents, and effects of online disinhibition on passive and active engagements of the respondents. The results of the study were scrutinized and compared to the findings of other researchers in the same field so as to give credence to the results of the current undertaking.
4.1 Socio-Demographic Profile of the respondents
The following were considered in this study in describing the sociodemographic profile of the selected fourth year students of Pasay City Science High School.

Table 1 Socio-Demographic Profile of the respondents
- 43 -
Gender Male Female Total Age 12 13 14 15 16 17 Total No. of hours 1 2 3 or more Total
Number of Respondents
Percentage
15 45 60
Number of Respondents 3 11 24 14 7 1 60 Number of Respondents 3 13 44 60
25% 75% 100%

Percentage 5% 18.33% 40% 23.33% 11.67% 1.67% 100% Percentage 5% 21.67% 73.33% 100%

The table shows that there are 60 respondents for this study. Of the 60 respondents, 15 are male and 45 are female. Therefore, the researchers concluded that most students who engaged online are women. Girls are more active online than boys. Among the respondents, most of them are 14 years of age since there are 24 of them. Also, most of the respondents spend their time on the internet for 3 or more hours. Hence, the researchers can clearly say that most of them spend their time doing things online on different social networking sites.
- 44 -
Percentage
25% Male 75% female
Figure 2 Profile of the respondents According to their Gender
The graph above shows that on the 60 respondents of the study, 75% are female and 25 % are male. Therefore, the researchers can say that most of the respondents are female.
- 45 -
Percentage
23.33% 11.67% 1.67% 5% 18.33% 40% 12 years old 13 years old 14 years old 15 years old 16 years old 17 years old
Figure 3 Profile of the respondents according to their age The graph shows that most of the respondents are 14 years of age since there are 40% of them from the total respondents. Of the 60 respondents, 23% of them are 15 years old, 18% for 13 years old, 12% are 16 years old, 5% for 12 years old and 2% for 17 years old.
- 46 -
Percentage
5% 21.67% 1 hour 73.33% 2 hours 3 or more hours
Figure 4 Profile of the respondents according to frequency of computer usage
The graph shows that among the 60 respondents for this study, 73% make use of the computer for 3 or more hours, 22% use the computer for 2 hours and 5% for 1 hour.

4.2 Factors of Online Disinhibition employed by the respondents
- 47 -
Table 2 Percentages of respondents answers on Dissociative Anonymity

Statement Strongly Agree Percentage Agree Percentage Disagree Percentage Strongly Disagree Percentage
1. I am able to dissociate my online persona from my online reality.
8.3%
44
73.3%
11
18.3%
2. I have changes in facial expressions, tone of my voice and aversion of eyes when I am online.
11
18.3%
22
36.7%
23
38.3%
6.7%
3. I am a different person in using words online.
6.7%
17
28.3%
28
46.7%
11
18.3%
4 I am a different person in using illustrations online.
3.3%
17
28.3%
32
53.3%
15%
5. I can easily be identified by my email address.
22
36.7%
25
41.7%
13.3%
8.3%
Based on the table above, most respondents agreed that they are able to dissociate their online persona from their only reality. But on the second statement, they disagreed that they have changes in facial expressions, tone of their voice and aversion of eyes when they are online. They also disagreed that they are different people in using words and illustrations online. On the last statement, they agreed that they can easily be identified by their email address. With these responses, it is proven that identity is the result of the process through which the individual assumes social values, shared norms of behavior and knowledge which allow the individual to feel part of a social group and at the same time, allow him to be recognized. Therefore, viewed as part of the psychical dimension that permits the realization of self.
- 48 -
Statement 5 Statement 4 Strongly Agree Statement 3 Statement 2 Statement 1 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
Figure 5 Percentage of respondents answers on Dissociative Anonymity
The figure shows the different percentages of the answers of respondents on different statement about dissociative anonymity. 73.3% answered agree that they can be able to dissociate their online persona from online reality and 41.7% on the statement that they can easily be identified by their email address. On the other hand, on statements two, three and four, 38.3% disagreed that they have changes in facial expressions, tone of their voice and aversion of their eyes when they are online, 46.7% disagreed that they are different people in using words and 53.3% in using illustrations online.

Table 3 Weighted mean of Dissociative Anonymity
- 49 -
Statement
Weighted Mean
Total Weighted Mean
Verbal Interpretation
1. I am able to dissociate my online persona from my online reality.
2.95
2. I have changes in facial expressions, tone of my voice and aversion of eyes when I am online.
2.75
2.76
3. I am a different person in using words online.
Agree
2.28
4 I am a different person in using illustrations online.
2.23
5. I can easily be identified by my email address.
3.08
Based on the data gathered from the given table, only a very small number of respondents strongly disagreed on dissociative anonymity as a factor, instead they agreed. The table also showed that dissociating your online persona from reality affects most of the respondents while using different illustrations online affects them the least. It approved the self- identity theory, which states that people form a social identity of values, attitudes and behavioral intentions from the ways they perceive and interpretations of events and interactions. It is also supported by social identity Theory wherein a person has not one, personal self, but rather several selves that correspond to widening circles of group membership.
- 50 -
2.5
1.5
Strongly Agree Agree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
0.5
0 Statement Statement Statement Statement Statement 1 2 3 4 5
Figure 6 Weighted mean of Dissociative Anonymity
The highest value of weighted mean is found in agree and the lowest values is found in strongly disagree. Dissociative Anonymity is said to be one of the factor in Online disinhibition that affects the passive and active engagement of the respondents. It means that the factor like dissociative anonymity will really helps on the respondent to hide his/her identity on online cyber world. It is supported by self- identity theory, which states that people form a social identity of values, attitudes and behavioral intentions from the ways they perceive and interpretations of events and interactions. It is also supported by social identity Theory wherein a person has not one, personal self, but rather several selves that correspond to widening circles of group membership.

Table 4 Percentages of respondents answers on Asynchronicity
- 51 -
1. I post something and wait 24 hours before reading the response
6.7%
13
21.7%
36
60%
11.7%
2 I wait for the response to my post without going offline
15%
18
30%
29
48.3%
6.7%
3. I go offline while waiting for the response to my post
6.7%
20
33.3%
32
53.3%
6.7%
4 I instantly respond to the message of my online companion the moment they post it..
20
33.3%
29
48.3%
11.7%
6.7%
5. I respond late to the post of online companion..
1.7%
16
26.7%
31
51.7%
12
20%
With the table presented above, most of the respondents agreed that they easily react on posts the moment it was posted. However, on the third statement, they disagreed on late comments or posts. In e-mail and message boards there are delays in feedback, which can open people up to express themselves with disinhibition since they know they wont have to deal with instant feedback from others. However, most of them easily make posts to have immediate responses and comments. In e-mail and message boards, communication is asynchronous. People don't interact with each other in real time. Others may take minutes, hours, days, or even months to reply to something you say. Not having to deal with someone's immediate reaction can be disinhibiting.

- 52 -
Figure 7 Percentage of respondents answers on Asynchronicity
The figure shows the different percentages of the answers of respondents on different statement about asynchronicity. 60% answered disagree that they wait 24 hours before reading the responses to their post and 48% on the statement that they wait for the response on their posts without going offline. On the other hand, on statement three, 53% disagreed that they go offline while waiting for the response to their post, 48.3% agreed that they instantly respond to the message of their online companion the moment they post it and 52% disagreed with the statement that they respond late to their online companion.

Table 5 Weighted mean of Asynchronicity
- 53 -
Statement
Weighted Mean
Total Weighted Mean
1. I post something and wait 24 hours before reading the response
2.23
2 I wait for the response to my post without going offline
2.53
3. I go offline while waiting for the response to my post
2.30
2.47
Disagree
4 I instantly respond to the message of my online companion the moment they post it.
3.18
5. I respond late to the post of online companion..
2.13
Based on the data gathered from the respondents, we can see that the highest value is found on the statement 3 above which means that the given respondents are very active on posting online. The table also shows that they are aware on the updates online. People don't interact with each other in real time. Others may take minutes, hours, days, or even months to reply to something you say. Not having to deal with someone's immediate reaction can be disinhibiting. In real life, it would be like saying something to someone, magically suspending time before that person can reply, and then returning to the conversation when you're willing and able to hear the response. Immediate, real-time feedback from others tends to have a very powerful effect on the ongoing flow of how much people reveal about them.

1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Statement Statement Statement Statement Statement 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
- 54 -
Figure 8 Weighted mean of Asynchronicity
Disagree is the dominant response of the respondents in the above graph. It is said that the characteristics of Asynchronicity helps the respondents a lot to be active in posting and reacting on their social online life. Therefore, Asynchronicity is one of the factors that really affects the passiveness and activeness of the respondents.

Table 6 Percentages of respondents answers on Solipsistic Introjection
- 55 -
1. I don't have to worry about how I look to others and what emotional signals I am sending through facial expressions.
10
16.7%
19
31.7%
26
43.3%
8.3%
2 I imagine the real-life expression of my online companion 3. I feel that Im talking personally to my online companion
18
30%
31
51.7%
15%
3.3%
18
30%
25
41.7%
16
26.7%
1.7%
4 I feel that I can't be identified in the same way I can, when I am in public. it.
8.3%
29
48.3%
23
38.3%
5%
5. . I have the same expression in both online and real-life when having an online activity.
17
28.3%
31
51.7%
12
20%
0%
Based on the table presented above, it can be seen that the respondents agreed to the statements that they imagine to the real-life expression of their online companion and they have the same expression in both online and real-life when having an online activity. However, on the first statement, they disagreed that they dont have to worry about how they look to others and what emotional signals they are sending through facial expressions. Because online communication is missing nonverbal cues that you would see in face-to-face communication, we create the voice, tone, personality and image of another person based on what he or she writes (and maybe through photos or videos). Our imaginations can get carried away with who other people are and what they mean. We might jump to conclusions and treat them differently than we would if we were in a face-to-face situation.

- 56 -
Figure 9 Percentage of respondents answers on Solipsistic Introjection
The figure shows the different percentages of the answers of respondents on different statement about Solipsistic Introjection. 43.3% answered disagree that they dont worry about how they look to others and what emotional signals they are sending through facial expressions. and 51.7% agreed on the statement that they imagine the real-life expression of their online companion. On the other hand, on statement three, 41.7% agreed that they feel that theyre talking personally to their online companion, 48.3% agreed that they cant be identified when they are in public and 51.7% agreed with the statement that they have the same expression in both online and real-life when having an online activity.
Table 7 Weighted mean of Solipsistic Introjection
Statement
Weighted Mean
Total Weighted Mean
1. I don't have to worry about how I look to others and what emotional signals I am sending through facial expressions.
2.70
2 I imagine the real-life expression of my online companion
3.12

2.89
3. I feel that Im talking personally to my online companion
- 57 -
Agree
3.0
4 I feel that I can't be identified in the same way I can, when I am in public. it.
2.57
5. . I have the same expression in both online and real-life when having an online activity.
3.07
Based on the computed weighted mean, it can be seen that the respondents strongly agreed on expressing themselves online without doubting what they would look like in public or in person. This is supported by Deindividuation Theory which is a psychological state aroused when individuals join crowds or groups characterized by diminished awareness of self and individuality. People fantasize about flirting, arguing with a boss, or very honestly confronting a friend about what they feel. In their imagination, where it's safe, people feel free to say and do all sorts of things that they wouldn't in reality.
1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Statement Statement Statement Statement Statement 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
Figure 10 Weighted mean of Solipsistic Introjection

In this graph, you will notice that most of the respondents answered strongly agree when it comes to Solipsistic Introjection. The respondents view their online companion as if they were in real life world. This is supported by Deindividuation Theory which is a psychological state aroused when individuals join crowds or groups characterized by diminished awareness of self and individuality.
- 58 -
Table 8 Percentages of respondents answers on Dissociative Imagination

1. I feel that I have another personality online.. 2 Im the exact opposite online
5%
16
26.7%
27
45%
14
23.3%
3.3%
8.3%
19
31.7%
34
56.7%
3. I assume that my online personality is another person
3.3%
13.3%
33
55%
17
28.3%
4 I can consider online activity a game.
6.7%
31
51.7%
19
31.7%
10%
5. I have the same personality online and in reallife
22
36.7%
30
50%
13.3%
0%
Based on the table above, the respondents strongly agree to the statement that they have the same personality online and in real-life and they consider online activity as a game. However, on the second statement, the respondents disagreed that they are the exact opposite online. Some people see their online life as a kind of game with different rules than in real life. This can happen through the portrayal of identity, communication with others or through role-playing games. If we combine solipsistic introjection with the escapability of cyberspace, we get a slightly different force that magnifies disinhibition. People may feel that the imaginary characters they created exist in a different space, that one's online persona along with the online others live in an make-believe dimension.

Statement 5 Statement 4 Strongly Agree Statement 3 Statement 2 Statement 1 0% 50% 100% Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
- 59 -
Figure 11 Percentage of respondents answers on Dissociative Imagination
The figure shows the different percentages of the answers of respondents on different statement about Dissociative Imagination. 45% answered disagree that they feel that they have another personality online. and 56.7% strongly disagreed on the statement that they are the exact opposite online. On the other hand, on statement three, 55% disagreed that they their online personality is another person and 51.7% agreed that they consider online activity as a game and 50% agreed with the statement that they have the same personality online and in real-life.
Table 9 Weighted mean of Dissociative Imagination
Statement
Weighted Mean
Total Weighted Mean
1. I feel that I have another personality online..
2.12
2 Im the exact opposite online
1.87
3. I assume that my online personality is another person
1.93
2.33
Disagree

4 I can consider online activity a game.
- 60 -
2.53
5. I have the same personality online and in real-life
3.2
The table above shows that weighted mean of the respondents is fairly disagreed. Their Online personality is assumed to be false. This is Fuckwad Theory. You have an ability to create a virtual self bypasses responsibilities and exigencies of people in real world situation where there is no need to be visible in the real world. People may feel that the imaginary characters they created exist in a different space, that one's online persona along with the online others live in an make-believe dimension, separate and apart from the demands and responsibilities of the real world. They split or dissociate online fiction from offline fact.
1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
Figure 12 Weighted mean of Dissociative Imagination
This graph shows the result on dissociative imagination. We noticed that most of the respondents answered disagree in some statements that will fit to dissociative imagination. The respondents feel that they have an opposite persona when it comes online. Their Online personality is assumed to be false and or true. This is Fuckwad Theory. You have an ability to create a virtual self bypasses responsibilities and

exigencies of people in real world situation where there is no need to be visible in the real world.
- 61 -
Table 10 Percentages of respondents answers on Minimizing Authority

1. I can easily interact with my superiors online...
13
21.7%
32
53.3%
14
23.3%
1.7%
2 I am not shy giving thoughts to celebrities in the internet. 3. I dont hesitate criticizing the authority.
12
20%
17
28.3%
26
43.3%
8.3%
13.3%
18
30%
27
45%
11.7%
4. I feel influential online.
11
18.3%
18
30%
26
43.3%
8.3%
5. I presume that everyone has an equal authority in the internet.
27
45%
28
46.7%
8.3%
0%
Based on the table presented, the respondents agreed to the statement that they can easily interact with their superiors online and they presume that everyone has an equal authority in the Internet. Because everyone on the Internet has an equal opportunity to share his or her voice and participate, everyone seems to start on the same playing field. In real life, people adhere to different norms of conformity to authority and restrain their behavior to fit these norms.
- 62 -
Statement 5 Statement 4 Strongly Agree Statement 3 Statement 2 Statement 1 0% 50% 100% Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
Figure 13 Percentage of respondents answers on Minimizing Authority
The figure shows the different percentages of the answers of respondents on different statement about Minimizing Authority. 45% answered disagree that they can easily interact with their superiors online and 56.7% strongly disagreed on the statement that they are not shy in giving thoughts to celebrities online. On the other hand, on statement three, 55% disagreed that they dont hesitate criticizing the authority and 51.7% agreed that they feel influential online and 50% agreed with the statement that they presume that everyone has an equal authority in the internet.
Table 11 Weighted mean of Minimizing Authority
Statement
Weighted Mean
Total Weighted Mean
1. I can easily interact with my superiors online...
3.05
2 I am not shy giving thoughts to celebrities in the internet.
2.6
3. I dont hesitate criticizing the authority.
2.43
2.76
Agree

4. I feel influential online.
- 63 -
2.58
5. I presume that everyone has an equal authority in the internet.
3.15
The table above manifests that the respondents can easily communicate with their superiors online without the hesitation of being criticized. There is the feeling of equality and freedom online. The table also shows that the respondents are fond of interacting with people online. While online a person's status in the in-person world may not be known to others and it may not have as much impact as it does in the inperson world. If people can't see you or your surroundings, they don't know if you are the president of a major corporation sitting in your expensive office, or some ordinary person lounging around at home in front of the computer. Even if people do know something about your offline status and power that elevated position may have little bearing on your online presence and influence.

1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Statement 1 Statement 2 Statement 3 Statement 4 Statement 5 Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
- 64 -
Figure 14 Weighted mean of Minimizing Authority
This graph shows the response of the respondents in which it shows that they can easily communicate with their superiors online without hesitation of being criticized. It also shows that they can influence online. They also presume that they have an equal authority in cyber world specifically online.
4.3 The Passive and Active Engagement performed by the respondents
- 65 -
Table 12 Weighted mean on Active Engagement

Statement Weighted Mean Total Weighted Mean
1. I respond to the posts of my online companion.
3.57
2 I commend my online companions.
2.98
3. I criticize my online companions.
2.13
2.68
Sometimes
4 I interact with strangers.
1.98
5. I socialize with different people at the same time.
2.73
The table above shows the sometimes got the highest weighted mean. It means that the respondents do have participation on online engagements through different social networking sites. This is clarified by social- presence Theory which states that different communication media of social presence, any interaction between two parties are concerned with developing or maintaining of relationship in better understanding of both the speaker and message.

2.5
- 66 -
2 Always Sometimes 1 Seldom Never 0.5
1.5
0 Statement 1 Statement 2 Statement 3 Statement 4 Statement 5
Figure 15 Weighted mean on Active Engagement
In this graph, we can see that sometimes is dominant on the respondents. Most of the respondents respond and commend on the post of their other companions. It means that the respondents do have participation on online engagements through different social networking sites. This is elucidated by social- presence Theory which states that different communication media of social presence, any interaction between two parties are concerned with developing or maintaining of relationship in better understanding of both the speaker and message.
Table 13

Weighted mean of Passive Engagement
Statement Weighted Mean Total Weighted Mean
1. I only view posts
- 67 -
2.88
2. I dont respond to any posts.
1.98
3. I dont want to interact with other people.
1.77
2.32
seldom
4. I keep my thoughts in my mind.
2.67
5. My only concern is my profile.
2.28
Based on the data gathered from the given table, most of the respondents answered that they did not keep their thoughts seldom and have their only concerns on their profile seldom. It also showed that passive engagement is the usual engagement performed by the respondents.
- 68 -
1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Statement Statement Statement Statement Statement 1 2 3 4 5
Always Sometimes Seldom Never
Figure 16 Weighted mean of Passive Engagement
Most of the respondents sometimes view post and dont want to interact with other people. They have only concern on their own profile. It can also conclude that most respondents engaged on passiveness online. They only keep their thoughts in their mind.
4.4 Effects of Passive and Active Engagements on Online Disinhibition employed by

the respondents
- 69 -
Table 14 Weighted mean of Active Engagement on Online Disinhibition
Statement
Weighted Mean
Total Weighted Mean
1. I participate in social activities.
3.42
2. I communicate well with people.
3.55
3. I feel free to approach someone.
3.15
2.94
Sometimes
4. Im the one who starts the conversation.
2.53
5. I am not suspicious to strangers.
2.03
Based on the computed weighted mean, It can be seen that communication and participation online mostly affects the disinhibition exhibited by the respondents. It is verbally interpreted that they sometimes do these things. This is approved by selfdisclosure theory which states that a simple approach to communications involves sharing about you. Originated and explained by Sidney Jourard, it even improves public speaking and connecting with groups. Community online is the ability of
people to come together, to have a sense of sharing and commonality in an online environment. Online relationships often include fantasy, stereotypical, idealized images. Internet communication strongly engages intrapersonal communication. The process of attaching meaning to the message is evident in online communication.

2.5
- 70 -
2 Always Sometimes 1 Seldom Never 0.5
1.5
0 Statement 1 Statement 2 Statement 3 Statement 4 Statement 5
Figure 17 Weighted mean of Active Engagement on Online Disinhibition
The graph shows that communicating and participating online mostly affects the online disinhibition of the respondents. We can conclude that they are sometimes suspicious to strangers. They also feel free to communicate to someone and try to start a communication. This is approved by self-disclosure theory which states that a simple approach to communications involves sharing about you. Originated and explained by Sidney Jourard, it even improves public speaking and connecting with groups.

Table 15 Weighted mean of Passive Engagement on Online Disinhibition
- 71 -
Statement
Weighted Mean
Total Weighted Mean
1. I want to work alone.
2.30
2. I dont want to interact with other people.
1.82
3. I dont entertain other peoples concern.
1.88
2.05
Seldom
4. I dont want to express myself.
2.12
5. I dont mind others business.
2.13
On the table, a lot of respondents answered on sometimes and seldom columns. As it was verbally interpreted, seldom became the dominant. It means that they often use passive engagement online according to deindividuation theory; this is a psychological state of decreased self-evaluation. For the internet is open for all the people around the world, it opens more opportunities. Communication is very effortless, not only for an individual to the world but also vice-versa. Talking to someone abroad was never this easy and reaching relatives is effortless.

1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Statement Statement Statement Statement Statement 1 2 3 4 5 Always Sometimes Seldom Never
- 72 -
Figure 18 Weighted mean of Passive Engagement on Online Disinhibition
In this figure, almost all the respondents answered seldom and sometimes. It means that they can express their feelings more online than in person without them knowing who they are. They dont want to work alone and dont mind others business too. It means that they often use passive engagement online according to deindividuation theory; this is a psychological state of decreased self-evaluation.
Table 16

Percentages of respondents answers on How Online Disinhibition Affects Passive and Active Engagements
- 73 -
Statement
Strongly Agree
Percentage
Agree
Percentage
Disagree
Percentage
Strongly Disagree
Percentage
1. It provides me a sense of protection, when I remain anonymous online while posting.
14
23.3%
33
55%
10
16.7%
5%
2. I have conversations that do not happen in real time.
12
20%
34
56.7%
14
23.3%
1.7%
3. I can imagine images of what my online companion looks like or sounds like into my mind while chatting with them.
19
31.7%
27
45%
18
30%
3.3%
4. I dissociate my real life personality to my online personality.
0%
22
36.7%
30
50%
5%
5. I find lack of authority a cause in changes in my interactions with others.
3.3%
25
41.7%
33
55%
0%
6. It provides me a sense of protection when I remain anonymous online while reading posts. 7. I barely have conversations that could be as short as a few minutes to the next post but could also be extraordinarily long time as well. 8. I can imagine images of what my online companion looks like or sounds like into my mind while reading their messages. 9. I dont dissociate my real life personality. 10. I find lack of authority a cause in changes in the interactions that are performed online.
10
16.7%
39
65%
10
16.7%
0%
15%
38
63.3%
13
21.7%
0%
15%
30
50%
22
36.7%
0%
15%
28
46.7%
19
31.7%
6.7%
8.3%
21
35%
34
56.7%
0%

Based on the table presented above, the respondents agreed to the statement that being anonymous while reading posts provide them a sense of protection. However, the respondents disagreed on the statement that they find lack of authority a cause in changes in the interactions that are performed online. Increased disinhibition online is thought to be one of the side effects of computer-mediated communication that is, communication between ourselves and a computer. it is important to determine what types of interaction can take place in these synchronous and asynchronous environments and to establish a variety of interactions, so that all students are able to speak, listen, and be heard. Structure a range of possible communication interactions that enhance your curriculum and meet students scheduling and learning needs as individuals and as a whole: Bulletin boards for more in-depth discussions of readings; small group chats to brainstorm topic ideas or virtual debates among smaller groups of students; virtual office hours in real-time. Archive conversations to allow for further reflection and follow-up. Also allow for noncomputer interactions, including telephone time, fax, and in some cases, face-to-face meetings among students and between instructor and students.
- 74 -
- 75 -
Statement 10 Statement 9 Statement 8 Statement 7 Statement 6 Statement 5 Statement 4 Statement 3 Statement 2 Statement 1 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
Figure 19 Percentage of respondents answers on How Online Disinhibition Affects Passive and Active Engagements
The figure shows the different percentages of the answers of respondents on different statement about How Online Disinhibition Affects Passive and Active Engagements. 55% of the respondents agreed to the statement that being anonymous while posting online provides a sense of protection, 57% agreed that they have conversations that do not happen in real time, 45% agreed that they can imagine images of what their online companion looks like or sounds like into their mind while chatting with them. On statement four, 50% disagreed that they dissociate their real life personality to their online personality, 55% disagreed that they find lack of authority a cause in changes in their interactions with others, 65% agreed that being anonymous online while reading posts provide them a sense of protection. 63% agreed on the statement that they barely have conversations that could be as short as a few minutes to the next post but could also be extraordinarily long time as well, 50% agreed that they can imagine images of what their online

companion looks like or sounds like into their mind while reading their messages. While 47% agreed that they dont dissociate their real life personality and 56.7% disagreed on the statement that they find lack of authority a cause in changes in the interactions that are performed online.
- 76 -
Table 17 Weighted mean on How Online Disinhibition Affects Passive and Active Engagements
Statement Weighted Mean Total Weighted Mean Verbal Interpretation
1. It provides me a sense of protection, when I remain anonymous online while posting.
2.85
2. I have conversations that do not happen in real time.
2.95
3. I can imagine images of what my online companion looks like or sounds like into my mind while chatting with them. 4. I dissociate my real life personality to my online personality.
2.78
2.77
Agree
2.52
5. I find lack of authority a cause in changes in my interactions with others. 6. It provides me a sense of protection when I remain anonymous online while reading posts. 7. I barely have conversations that could be as short as a few minutes to the next post but could also be extraordinarily long time as well. 8. I can imagine images of what my online companion looks like or sounds like into my mind while reading their messages.
2.53
3.05
2.88
2.87
9. I dont dissociate my real life personality.
2.65
10. I find lack of authority a cause in changes in the interactions that are performed online.
2.65
Based on the data gathered from the given table, almost all of the respondents agreed that online disinhibition truly affects the passiveness and activeness of an individual as an engagement. The table also showed that dissociating your online

persona from reality affects the disinhibition exhibited by an individual. The rest of the factors proved that it does have the connection with online disinhibition. The respondents Answers were frequently on the agreed column which means that they are really engaging themselves on online activities. While online, some people selfdisclose or act out more frequently or intensely than they would in person. Everyday users on the Internetas well as clinicians and researchers17have noted how people say and do things in cyberspace that they wouldnt ordinarily say and do in the face-to-face world. They loosen up, feel less restrained, and express themselves more openly. The online disinhibition effect is not the only factor that determines how much people self-disclose or act out in cyberspace. Individual differences play an important role. For example, the intensity of a persons underlying feelings, needs, and drive level affect susceptibility to disinhibition. Personality styles also vary greatly in the strength of defense mechanisms and tendencies towards inhibition or expression. People all over the world cut loose in cyberspace, revealing
- 77 -
inappropriate things about themselves and acting out in ways they would never behave had they shared physical space while interacting. Because of this, disinhibition greatly affects the engagements performed by teenagers, especially those who possess active engagements.

2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
- 78 -
Figure 20 Weighted mean on How Online Disinhibition Affects Passive and Active Engagements
Based on the graph presented above, most of the respondents answered agree and disagree on the statements. It means that it provides protection to the respondents while they are online. The respondents also agreed that they have conversations that could not happen in real time. They also agree that it dissociate their real life personality to their online personality. They barely have conversations that could be as short as a few minutes to the next post but could also be extraordinarily long time as well. They can imagine images of what their online companion looks like or sounds like into their mind while reading their messages.
- 79 -
Chapter V
Conclusion and Directions for Future Research
This chapter draws together on the findings of the study and summarizes that were posed as objectives of the investigation and suggests direction.
5.1 Conclusion
Based on the data gathered, most of the respondents are female because they are more active on using social online sites, more open on self-disclosing and more into doing online activities than males. Within the set of respondents, 14 years of age compromises the largest number of respondents. Majority of the respondents spent their time greater than 3 hours in front of their computers.
In terms on the factors affecting their online Disinhibition, the respondents are engaged in Dissociative Anonymity, using other usernames in order to protect themselves from embarrassments. They can easily change their identity from other distinguishing characteristics from people. However they do not employ
Asynchronicity wherein the users become very personal on posting something online that might hurt other users then by simply logging out, they can easily escape from their inflammatory opinions. Also, the respondents utilized Solipsisitic Introjection in which they make visual images of their online friends, imagining their reactions, emotions and looks, therefore assigning an identity to them. On the other hand, the respondents dont apply Dissociative Imagination during their online activities, for they dont interchange their personality on reality to their online persona in order to play games on cyberspace. In addition, they make use of Minimizing Authority in order to conceal their status online, wherein youre not giving a hint what personality you are online, thus making it easy for you to interact with higher hierarchy people.
The engagements exercised by the respondents are active engagements in which they do posts online, commend or criticize posts, and socializing with their

online friends and even strangers. Their passive engagements are seldom established since they perform active engagements more. Their passive
- 80 -
engagements involved keeping their thoughts, and only viewing posts not even reacting to it.
Their engagements online affect their performance on social networking sites since they become more engrossed on doing online activities. They feel free expressing themselves on profile-oriented sites, making it easier for them to interact with other people. They are much familiarized on doing activities involving cyberspace.
In general, online Disinhibition affects the engagements performed by the respondents. The online Disinhibition factors greatly impacts the activities done by the respondents online. Online Disinhibition gives the respondents a sense of
freedom expressing them online than what they normally do in face-to-face conversations. They become very open on sharing even their personal things. Truly, online Disinhibition becomes an indicator of the passiveness or activeness in engagement employed by the respondents.
5.2 Directions for future research
Future researchers may consider the ff. studies:
The effects of Passive and Active Engagements On the Online Engagements of Selected Pasay City Science High School students
The effects of Online Disinhibition on the Online Persona of the Selected Pasay City Science High School students
- 81 -
A Comparative Study on the Effects of Online Blogging and Online Disinhibition on Selected Pasay City Science High School students
An Analysis on the Effects of Online Disinhibition on Passive and Active Engagements among selected Pasay City Science High School students
The effects of Passive and Active Engagements on the Online Persona of Selected Pasay City Science High School students

Bibliography
- 82 -
Journals
1. Suler, J.R. and Phillips, W. (1998). The Bad Boys of Cyberspace: Deviant Behaviour in Multimedia Chat Communities. CyberPsychology and Behaviour, 1, 275-294.Turner, R. H. (1974) Collective Behaviour in R.E.L. Farris (ed.), Handbook of modern sociology (pp. 382-425). Chicago, IL: Rand-McNally.
2. Berson, M. (2002) Lessons Learned about Schools and Their Responsibility to Foster Safety Online. Presented at conference NetSafe: Society, Safety and the Internet
3. Joinson, A (1998) Causes and Implications of Disinhibited Behaviour on the Net in Gackenbach, J. (1998). Psychology and the Internet: Intrapersonal, Interpersonal, and Transpersonal Implications. California. Academic Press (Harcourt, Brace & Company).
4.10. Coles, J. (1997) Log off! Clear my Screen. The Gaudian, 19 July 1997, p. 5 In Gackenback, J. (1998) Psychology and the Internet: Intrapersonal, Interpersonal, and Transpersonal Implications. California. Academic Press. (Harcourt, Brace & Company).
Internet Sources
1.Joinson, A. (1998). Causes and implications of disinhibited behavior on the Internet. In: Gackenbach, J. (ed.), Psychology and the Internet: intrapersonal, interpersonal,and transpersonal implications. San Diego: Academic Press, pp. 43 60.
2. Joinson, A.N. (2001). Self-disclosure in computermediated communication: the role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology 31:177192.

3. Leung, L. (2002). Loneliness, self-disclosure, and ICQ (I seek you) use.CyberPsychology & Behavior 5:241251.
- 83 -
4. Postmes, T., Spears, R., Sakhel, K., et al. (2001). Social influence in computer mediated communication: The effects of anonymity on group behavior. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin 27:12431254.
5. Adrianson, L., & Hjelmquist, E. (1991). Group processes in face-to-face and computer-mediated communication. Behaviour & Information Technology, 10, 281296.
6. Baym, N. K. (1995) The Emergence of Community in Computer-Mediated Communications. In Cybersociety: Computer-Mediated Communication and
Community, Pg. 138-164, Sage Publishing, London.
7. Bem, D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. In L. Berkowitz(ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, (vol. 6, pg 1-62). New York. Academic Press.
8. Ciskowski, D. & Scheier, M. F. (1995) In Gackenback, J. (1998) Psychology and the Internet: Intrapersonal, Interpersonal, and Transpersonal Implications. California. Academic Press. (Harcourt, Brace & Company).
9. Dyer, Green, Pitts & Millward (1995). What's the flaming problem? CMC: deindividuating or disinhibiting? In M.A.R. Kirby, A.J. Dix, and J.E. Finlay (Eds.), People and Computers X. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10.
Gackenbach,
J.
(1998).
Psychology
and
the
Internet:
Intrapersonal,
Interpersonal, and Transpersonal Implications. California. Academic Press (Harcourt, Brace & Company).

11. Hiltz, S. R., Turoff, M., & Johnson, K. (1989). Experiments in group decision making, 3: Disinhibition, deindividuation, and group process in pen name and real name computer conferences. Decision Support Systems, 5, 217-232.
- 84 -
12. Hrachovec, H. (2001) New Kids on the Net in Community informatics: shaping computer-mediated social relations / edited by Leigh Keeble and Brian D. Loader. New York : Routledge, 2002
13. Joinson, A. N., & Harris, P.R. (1995). Self-enhancement and self-perception on the Internet: A study of football fans on the WWW. Presented at BPS London Conference and in Joinson, A (1998). Causes and Implications of Disinhibited Behaviour on the Net
14. Lea, M., O'Shea, T., Fung, P., & Spears, R. (1992). 'Flaming' in computermediated communication. In M. Lea (Ed), Contexts in computer mediated communication. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
15. Williams, K.D., Cheung, K.T., & Choi, W. (2000). Cyberostracism: Effects of Being Ignored Over the Internet. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5), 748-762.
16. Yoon, S. (2001) Culture, Computer Literacy, and the Media in Creating Public Attitudes toward CMC in Japan and Korea in Community informatics : shaping computer-mediated social relations / edited by Leigh Keeble and Brian D. Loader. New York : Routledge, 2002
- 85 -
Appendix A
Letter to the Parents
Dear Parents,
Good Day!
We, a group from IV-Einstein in Research III(Thesis) will conduct a study on Online Disinhibition: Its Effects on Passive and Active Engagement among Selected Pasay City Science High School Students. With regards to this, we would like you to allow your son/daughter _____________________________ to be one of our respondents. Theyll be staying after class to answer the given questionnaire that we are going to provide.
We are hoping that you will cooperate with us. Thank you very much and God Bless!
Kindly check your preferred decision. I am allowing my son/daughter to be one of your respondents. I am not allowing my son/daughter to be one of your respondents.
Noted by:
Proponents: Gonzales, Ma. Nhelette B.
____________________________ Ms. Ma. Jacqueline D. Bernardino Research III Adviser
Jolongbayan, April Joy S. Teodoro, Joshua Psalms Y. Tuya, Angel Anne D.
____________________ Parents Signature
- 86 -
Appendix B
Letter to the Respondents
Dear Respondent, Good Day! We, a group from IV Einstein in Research III (Thesis) will conduct a Study on Online Disinhibition: Its Effects on Passive and Active Engagement among Selected Pasay City Science High School. You are chosen through Purposive Sampling Technique. You will answer the given questionnaire that we are going to provide. Thank you very much for the cooperation. God Bless.
- 87 -
Appendix C
Questionnaire
Name: __________________________________ Year & Section: ___________________________ Frequency of Computer Usage (hours): 1 2 3 or more
Age: _______________ Gender: ____________
Direction: Put a check on one of the four columns regarding on your perception of the given statement.
PART I. Online Disinhibition Statement A. Dissociative Anonymity 1. I am able to dissociate my online persona from my online reality. 2. I have changes in facial expressions, tone of my voice and aversion of eyes when I am online. 3. I am a different person in using words online. 4. I am a different person in using illustrations online. 5. I can easily be identified by my email address. B. Asynchronicity Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree

1. I post something and wait 24 hours before reading the response. 2. I wait for the response to my post without going offline. 3. I go offline while waiting for the response to my post. 4. I instantly respond to the message of my online companion the moment they post it. 5. I respond late to the post of online companion. C. Solipsistic Introjection 1. I don't have to worry about how I look to others and what emotional signals I am sending through facial expressions. 2. I imagine the real-life expression of my online companion. 3. I feel that Im talking personally to my online companion. 4. I feel that I can't be identified in the same way I can, when I am in public. 5. I have the same expression in both online and real-life when having an online activity. D. Dissociative Imagination 1. I feel that I have another personality online. 2. Im the exact opposite online. 3. I assume that my online personality is another person. 4. I can consider online activity a
- 88 -

game. 5. I have the same personality online and in real-life. E. Minimizing Authority 1. I can easily interact with my superiors online. 2. I am not shy giving thoughts to celebrities in the internet. 3. I dont hesitate criticizing the authority. 4. I feel influential online. 5. I presume that everyone has an equal authority in the internet.
- 89 -
PART II. Online Engagements Statement A. Active Engagement 1. I respond to the posts of my online companion. 2. I commend my online companions. 3. I criticize my online companions. 4. I interact with strangers. 5. I socialize with different people at the same time. B. Passive Engagement 1. I only view posts 2. I dont respond to any posts. 3. I dont want to interact with other people. 4. I keep my thoughts in my mind. 5. My only concern is my profile. Always Sometimes Seldom Never

PART III. Real-Life Engagements Statement A. Active Engagement 1. I participate in social activities. 2. I communicate well with people. 3. I feel free to approach someone. 4. Im the one who starts the conversation. 5. I am not suspicious to strangers. B. Passive Engagement 1. I want to work alone. 2. I dont want to interact with other people. 3. I dont entertain other peoples concern. 4. I dont want to express myself. 5. I dont mind others business. Always Sometimes Seldom Never
- 90 -
PART IV. Effects of Online Disinhibition to Engagements Statement A. Active Engagement 1. I can express my feelings more online than in person without them knowing who am I. 2. Its easier to have a long discussion online than in person. 3. I find it more difficult to identify ones true intentions online than in person. 4. Its easier to pretend online than in Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree

person. 5. I feel more comfortable approaching my superiors online than in person. B. Passive Engagement 1. I keep all my thoughts more in person than in online. 2. I dont want long discussions more in person than in online. 3. I care less on the true intentions of an individual in person than in online. 4. I stay more the same in person than in online. 5. I feel shyer approaching my superiors in person than in online.
- 91 -
- 92 -
Appendix D
Computations Finding the percentage of respondents answers on different factors
No. of respondents who chose strongly agree = Total number of respondents
x 100
5 60 x 100
= 13.3%
Weighted mean Example:
Sum of all the answers of the 60 respondents Total number of the respondents
177 60
2.95

Thesis Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thesis Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

1.1 Background of the Study

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

Specifically, it will aim to answer the following question:

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

Specifically, it will aspire to answer the following question:

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

This study, though not exhaustive, is beneficial to the following:

For the students,

For the teachers,

For the parents,

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

For the members of the academe,

For the future researchers,

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

Social Presence Theory

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

Self Disclosure Theory

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

1.5.5 Deindividuation Theory

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

Factors Affecting Online Disinhibition

Effects of Online Disinhibition on Online Engagement of Students

Figure 1 Conceptual Framework

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

Leisure is defined as the time of enjoyment, relaxation or recreation

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

Here are some of the levels of engagements done on the Internet:

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

Statistical Treatment of Data

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

Legend Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree

Interpretation 3.25 4.00 2.50 3.24 1.75 2.49 1.00 1.74

PASAY CITY SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL

Results and Discussion