"Possible Selves represent individuals’ ideas of what they might become, what they would like to become, and what they are afraid of becoming, and thus provide a conceptual link beteen cognition and motivation. PSs are the cognitive components of hopes, fears, goals, and threats; they give the specific self-relevant form, meaning, organization, and direction to these dynamics. It is suggested that PSs function as incentives for future behavior and to provide an evaluative and interpretive context for the current view of self."
—
Markus, H. & Nurius, P. (1986, Sept). Possible Selves. American Psychologist, 41(9): 954-969.
Abstract only.
I tested this theory of identity development in online environments in my Masters research. Markus and Nurius’ work provided a framework for how we choose which new aspects of our desired or undesired selves we test online - a safe, relatively consequence-free space - and whether they are adopted into the offline self.
It’s a very satisfying and parsimonious theory, and appears to be apt both online and off.
"The use of social media is heading towards the convergence of our virtual and real selves."
—
Sheryl Sandberg, COO of Facebook, in the 2011 article, Sharing to the power of 2012 in The Economist
Facebook: “authentic” identity?
"He externalised what was important for him, so he would have the cues he needed to remember something later."
—
Prof Viktor Mayer-Schonberger of the OII, in a review of his book, Delete: The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age from The Guardian.
as an aside: this explains why I am “cryptic” on Twitter. i explicitly use the service to externalise things that will trigger - for me and for me alone - a whole memory i can recall later.
More from the review:
The overabundance of cheap storage on hard disks means that it is no longer economical to even decide whether to remember or forget.
“compelling institutional forgetting”
So much of our past is so readily retrievable in the digital age that we can’t help but stumble across things we’d do better to forget.
"Plato observed that even a habitually just man who possessed such a ring would become a thief, knowing that he couldn’t be caught."
—
Online, Anonymity Breeds Contempt. A historical perspective on anonymity from an article on internet trolling on NYT.com in 2010.
BUT! Anonymity isn’t the only issue. Here’s a report from The Guardian in 2007 including this quote from Dr Chris Fullwood, “internet researcher”:
Removing anonymity may have some small effect, but not a massive one. This is because a number of factors contribute towards what psychologists call online disinhibition. Removing one of them - the anonymity - and not removing any of the others means it will probably still occur as people remain invisible and so can disassociate their online from their offline persona.
(note many of the links in the guardian article are broken/old!)
"…if you use Facebook, and your friends sign up for social applications, your name and details could appear in unexpected places"
—
Luluvise’s date-rating site shows where your Facebook data can end up
from The Guardian on 8 Feb 2012.