For related uses, see Internet identity (disambiguation).

Internet identity (IID), also online identity or internet persona, is a social identity that an Internet user establishes in online communities and websites. It can also be considered as an actively constructed presentation of oneself. Although some people choose to use their real names online, some Internet users prefer to be anonymous, identifying themselves by means of pseudonyms, which reveal varying amounts of personally identifiable information. An online identity may even be determined by a user’s relationship to a certain social group they are a part of online. Some can even be deceptive about their identity.

In some online contexts, including Internet forums, online chats, and massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs), users can represent themselves visually by choosing an avatar, an icon-sized graphic image. Avatars are one way users express their online identity.[1] Through interaction with other users, an established online identity acquires a reputation, which enables other users to decide whether the identity is worthy of trust.[2] Online identities are associated with users through authentication, which typically requires registration and logging in. Some websites also use the user’s IP address or tracking cookies to identify users.[3]

The concept of the self, and how this is influenced by emerging technologies, are a subject of research in fields such as education, psychology and sociology. The online disinhibition effect is a notable example, referring to a concept of unwise and uninhibited behavior on the Internet, arising as a result of anonymity and audience gratification.[4]


  • 1 Online social identity
    • 1.1 Identity expression and identity exposure
    • 1.2 The concept of the mask
      • 1.2.1 Blended identity
  • 2 In different contexts
    • 2.1 Blogging
    • 2.2 Human resources
    • 2.3 Social networks
    • 2.4 Online business
    • 2.5 Online learning
      • 2.5.1 Communication
      • 2.5.2 Perception of professor
    • 2.6 Virtual world
    • 2.7 Internet forum
  • 3 Benefits and concerns
    • 3.1 Benefits
    • 3.2 Concerns
      • 3.2.1 Reliability
      • 3.2.2 Catfishing online
  • 4 Identity management infrastructures
    • 4.1 Reputation management
    • 4.2 Relation to real-world social constraints
  • 5 Disembodiment and implications
  • 6 Legal and security issues
    • 6.1 Online identity and user’s rights
    • 6.2 Online predators
  • 7 The market
  • 8 See also
  • 9 Notes
  • 10 External links

Online social identity[edit]

Identity expression and identity exposure[edit]

See also: Online identity management and Impression management

The social web, i.e. the usage of the web to support the social process, represents a space in which people have the possibility to express and expose their identity[5] in a social context. For example, people define their identity explicitly by creating user profiles in social network services such as Facebook or LinkedIn and online dating services.[6] By expressing opinions on blogs and other social media, they define more tacit identities.

The disclosure of a person’s identity may present certain issues[2] related to privacy. Many people adopt strategies that help them control the disclosure of their personal information online.[7] Some strategies require users to invest considerable effort.

The emergence of the concept of online identity has raised many questions among academics. Social networking services and online avatars have complicated the concept of identity. Academia has responded to these emerging trends by establishing domains of scholarly research such as technoself studies, which focuses on all aspects of human identity in technological societies.

Online activities may affect our offline personal identity, as well.[8]

The concept of the mask[edit]

Dorian Wiszniewski and Richard Coyne in their contribution to the book Building Virtual Communities explore online identity, with emphasis on the concept of “masking” identity.[clarification needed] They point out that whenever an individual interacts in a social sphere they portray a mask of their identity. This is no different online and in fact becomes even more pronounced due to the decisions an online contributor must make concerning his or her online profile. He or she must answer specific questions about age, gender, address, username and so forth. Furthermore, with the accrual of one’s online activity, his or her mask is increasingly defined by his or her style of writing, vocabulary and topics.

The kind of mask one chooses reveals at least something of the subject behind the mask. One might call this the “metaphor” of the mask. The online mask does not reveal the actual identity of a person. It, however, does reveal an example of what lies behind the mask. For instance, if a person chooses to act like a rock star online, this metaphor reveals an interest in rock music. Even if a person chooses to hide behind a totally false identity, this says something about the fear and lack of self-esteem behind the false mask.

Because of many emotional and psychological dynamics, people can be reluctant to interact online. By evoking a mask of identity a person can create a safety net. One of the great fears of online identity is having one’s identity stolen or abused. This fear keeps people from sharing who they are. Some are so fearful of identity theft or abuse that they will not even reveal information already known about them in public listings. By making the mask available, people can interact with some degree of confidence without fear.

Wiszniewski and Coyne state “Education can be seen as the change process by which identity is realized, how one finds one’s place. Education implicates the transformation of identity. Education, among other things, is a process of building up a sense of identity, generalized as a process of edification.” Students interacting in an online community must reveal something about themselves and have others respond to this contribution. In this manner, the mask is constantly being formulated in dialogue with others and thereby students will gain a richer and deeper sense of who they are. There will be a process of edification that will help students come to understand their strengths and weaknesses.[9]

Blended identity[edit]

This mask perspective is likened to the concept of ‘blended identity’,[10] whereby the offline-self informs the creation of a new online-self which in turn informs the offline-self through further interaction with those the individual first met online.

In different contexts[edit]


As blogs allow an individual to express his or her views in individual essays or as part of a wider discussion, it creates a public forum for expressing ideas. Bloggers often choose to use pseudonyms, whether in platforms such as WordPress or in interest-centered sites like Blogster, to protect personal information and allow them more editorial freedom to express ideas that might be unpopular with their family, employers, etc. Use of a pseudonym (and a judicious approach to revealing personal information) can allow a person to protect their “real” identities, but still build a reputation online using the assumed name.[11]

Human resources[edit]

Digital identity management is becoming something that individuals need to consider when applying for jobs of while working for a company. Social media has been a tool for human resources for years. A KPMG report on social media in human resources say that 76 percent of American companies used LinkedIn for recruiting.[12] The ease of search means that reputation management will become more vital especially in professional services such as lawyers, doctors and accountants.

Social networks[edit]

Online social networks like Facebook and MySpace allow people to maintain an online identity with some overlap between online and real world context. These identities are often created to reflect a specific aspect or ideal version of themselves. Representations include pictures, communications with other ‘friends’ and membership in network groups. Privacy control settings on social networks are also part of social networking identity.[13]

Some users may use their online identity as an extension of their physical selves, and center their profiles around realistic details. These users value continuity in their identity, and would prefer being honest with the portrayal of themselves. However, there is also a group of social network users that would argue against using a real identity online. These users have experimented with online identity, and ultimately what they have found is that it is possible to create an alternate identity through the usage of such social networks. For example, a popular blogger on[14] writes under the name of Kel Campbell – a name that was chosen by her, not given to her. She states that when she was verbally attacked online by another user, she was able to protect herself from the sting of the insult by taking it as Kel, rather than her true self. Kel became a shield of sorts, and acted as a mask that freed the real user beneath it.

Such are the benefits of forming an alternate identity in online spaces. The “I” becomes subject to the “Me”, and individuals are given the power to shape themselves into whoever (or whatever) they desire to become. Stories of people learning about their “hidden extroversion” or “unknown creativity” or becoming “someone else” are still at large. Research from scientists such as Danah Boyd and Knut Lundby has even found that in some cultures, the ability to form an identity online is considered a sacred privilege. This is because having an online identity allows the user to accomplish things that otherwise are impossible to do in real life. These cultures believe that the self has become a subjective concept on the online spaces; by logging onto their profiles, users are essentially freed from the prison of a physical body and can “create a narrative of the self in virtual space that may be entirely new”.

The possibilities are endless – which is a feasible explanation for the explosive popularity of social networking sites in the past decade. Users are captivated by the opportunity to express themselves in an endless number of ways. Perhaps social networks will always remain popular, as long as the incentive to join is always present.

Online business[edit]

As the development of social networks, there appears a new economic phenomenon: doing business via social networks. For example, there are many users of WeChat called wei-businessmen sell products on WeChat. Doing business via social networks is not that easy. The identities of users in social networks are not the same as that in real world. For the sake of security, people do not tend to trust someone in social networks, in particular when it is related with money. So for wei-businessmen, reputations are very important for wei-business. They need invest enormous efforts to gain reputations among the users of WeChat, then these wei-businessmen could probably sell something to users.

Online learning[edit]

Main article: E-learning

Online identity in classrooms forces people to reevaluate their concepts of classroom environments.[citation needed] With the invention of online classes, classrooms have changed and no longer have the traditional face-to-face communications. These communications have been replaced by computer screen. Students are no longer defined by visual characteristics unless they make them known. There are pros and cons to each side. In a traditional classroom, students are able to visually connect with a teacher who was standing in the same room. During the class, if questions arise, clarification can be provided immediately. Students can create face-to-face connections with other students, and these connections can easily be extended beyond the classroom.[citation needed] For timid or socially awkward students, this ability to form and extend relationships through personal contact may hold little appeal.[citation needed] For these students, the appeal may reside in online courses, where computer communications allow them a greater degree of separation and anonymity.[citation needed]

With the prevalence of remote Internet communications, students do not form preconceptions of their classmates based on the classmate’s appearance or speech characteristics.[citation needed] Rather, impressions are formed based only on the information presented by the classmate. Some students are more comfortable with this paradigm as it avoids the discomfort of public speaking. Students who do not feel comfortable stating their ideas in class can take time to sit down and think through exactly what they wish to say.[citation needed]

Communication via written media may lead students to take more time to think through their ideas since their words are in a more permanent setting (online) than most conversations carried on during class (Smith).

Perception of professor[edit]

Online learning situations also cause a shift in perception of the professor. Whereas anonymity may help some students achieve a greater level of comfort, professors must maintain an active identity with which students may interact. The students should feel that their professor is ready to help whenever they may need it. Although students and professors may not be able to meet in person, emails and correspondence between them should occur in a timely manner. Without this students tend to drop online classes since it seems that they are wandering through a course without anyone to guide them.[15][16][17]

Virtual world[edit]

Main article: Virtual world

In Virtual world, the users create a personal avatar and communicate with others through the virtual identity. The virtual personal figure and voice may draw from the real figure or fantasy worlds. The virtual figure to some degree reflects the personal expectation, and users may play a totally different personality in virtual world than in reality.

Internet forum[edit]

Main article: Internet forum

An Internet forum, or message board, is an online discussion site where people can hold conversations in the form of posted messages. There are many types of Internet forums based on certain themes or groups. The properties of online identities also differ from different type of forums. For example, the users in a university BBS usually know some of the others in reality since the users can only be the students or professors in this university. However the freedom of expression is limited since some university BBSs are under control of the school administration and the identities are related to student IDs. On another hand, in some question-and-answer website like “ZhiHu” in China, is open to the public and users can create accounts only with e-mail address. But they can describe their specialties or personal experiences to show reliability in certain questions, and other users can also invite them to answer questions based on their profiles. The answers and profiles can be either real-name or anonymous.

Benefits and concerns[edit]


A discussed positive aspect of virtual communities is that people can now present themselves without fear of persecution, whether it is personality traits, behaviors that they are curious about, or the announcement of a real world identity component that has never before been announced.[citation needed]

This freedom results in new opportunities for society as a whole, especially the ability for people to explore the roles of gender and sexuality in a manner that can be harmless, yet interesting and helpful to those undertaking the change. Online identity has given people the opportunity to feel comfortable in wide-ranging roles, some of which may be underlying aspects of the user’s life that the user is unable to portray in the real world.[citation needed]

Online identity has a beneficial effect for minority groups, including ethnic minority populations, people with disabilities, etc. Online identities may help remove prejudices created by stereotypes found in real life, and thus provide a greater sense of inclusion.

A prime example of these opportunities is the establishment of many communities welcoming gay and lesbian teens who are dealing with their sexuality. These communities allow teens to share their experiences with one another and older gay and lesbian people, and may they provide a community that is both non-threatening and non-judgmental. In a review of such a community, Silberman quotes an information technology worker, Tom Reilly, as stating: “The wonderful thing about online services is that they are an intrinsically decentralized resource. Kids can challenge what adults have to say and make the news”.[18] If teen organizers are successful anywhere, news of it is readily available. The Internet is arguably the most powerful tool that young people with alternative sexualities have ever had.[citation needed]

The online world provides users with a choice to determine which sex, sexuality preference and sexual characteristics they would like to embody. In each online encounter, a user essentially has the opportunity to interchange which identity they would like to portray.[citation needed] As McRae argues in Surkan (2000), “The lack of physical presence and the infinite malleability of bodies complicates sexual interaction in a singular way: because the choice of gender is an “option” rather than a strictly defined biological characteristic, the entire concept of gender as a primary marker of identity becomes partially subverted.”

Online identity can offer potential social benefits to those with physical and sensory disabilities. The flexibility of online media provides control over their disclosure of impairment, an opportunity not typically available in real world social interactions.[19] Researchers highlight its value in improving inclusion. However, it is notable that the affordance of “normalization” offers the possibility of experiencing non-stigmatized identities while also offering the capacity to create harmful and dangerous outcomes, which may jeopardize participants’ safety.[20]


Primarily, concerns regarding virtual identity revolve around the areas of misrepresentation and the contrasting effects of on and offline existence. Sexuality and sexual behavior online provide some of the most controversial debate with many concerned about the predatory nature of some users. This is particularly in reference to concerns about child pornography and the ability of pedophiles to obscure their identity.[citation needed]

Finally, the concerns regarding the connection between on and offline lives are challenging the notions of what constitutes real experience. In reference to gender, sexuality and sexual behavior, the ability to play with these ideas has resulted in a questioning of how virtual experience may affect one’s offline emotions.[citation needed] As McRae states, at its best, virtual sex not only complicates but drastically unsettles the division between mind, body, and self that has become a comfortable truism in Western metaphysics. When projected into virtuality, mind, body and self all become consciously-manufactured constructs through which individuals interact with each other.[21]


The identities that people define in the social web are not necessarily facets of their offline self. Studies have shown that people lie in online dating services.[22][23] In the case of social network services such as Facebook, companies are even proposing to sell ‘friends’ as a way to increase a user’s visibility, calling into question even more the reliability of a person’s ‘social identity’.[24]

Van Gelder[25] reported a famous incident occurring on a computer conferencing system during the early 80s where a male psychiatrist posed as Julie, a female psychologist with multiple disabilities including deafness, blindness, and serious facial disfigurement. Julie endeared herself to the computer conferencing community, finding psychological and emotional support from many members. The psychiatrist’s choice to present differently was sustained by drawing upon the unbearable stigma attached to Julie’s multiple disabilities as justification for not meeting face-to-face. Lack of visual cues allowed the identity transformation to continue, with the psychiatrist also assuming the identity of Julie’s husband, who adamantly refused to allow anyone to visit Julie when she claimed to be seriously ill. This example highlights the ease with which identity may be constructed, transformed, and sustained by the textual nature of online interaction and the visual anonymity it affords.

Catfishing online[edit]

Catfishing is a way for a user to create a fake online profile, sometimes with fake photos and information, in order to enter into a relationship, intimate or platonic, with another user.[26] Catfishing became popular in mainstream culture through the MTV reality show Catfish.

Identity management infrastructures[edit]

A problem facing anyone who hopes to build a positive online reputation is that reputations are site-specific; for example, one’s reputation on eBay cannot be transferred to Slashdot.

Multiple proposals have been made[citation needed] to build an identity management infrastructure into the Web protocols. All of them require an effective public key infrastructure so that the identity of two separate manifestations of an online identity (say, one on Wikipedia and another on Twitter) are probably one and the same.

OpenID, an open, decentralized standard for authenticating users is used for access control, allowing users to log on to different services with the same digital identity. These services must allow and implement OpenID.

Reputation management[edit]

Main article: Reputation management

Given the malleability of online identities, some economists have expressed surprise that flourishing trading sites (such as eBay) have developed on the Internet.[citation needed] When two pseudonymous identities propose to enter into an online transaction, they are faced with the prisoner’s dilemma: the deal can succeed only if the parties are willing to trust each other, but they have no rational basis for doing so. But successful Internet trading sites have developed reputation management systems, such as eBay’s feedback system, which record transactions and provide the technical means by which users can rate each other’s trustworthiness. However, users with malicious intent can still cause serious problems on such websites.[13]

An online reputation is the perception that one generates on the Internet based on their digital footprint. Digital footprints accumulate through all of the content shared, feedback provided and information that created online.[27] Due to the fact that if someone has a bad online reputation, he can easily change his pseudonym, new accounts on sites such as eBay or Amazon are usually distrusted. If an individual or company wants to manage their online reputation, they will face many more difficulties. This is why a merchant on the web having a brick and mortar shop is usually more trusted.

Relation to real-world social constraints[edit]

Ultimately, online identity cannot be completely free from the social constraints that are imposed in the real world. As Westfall (2000, p. 160) discusses, “the idea of truly departing from social hierarchy and restriction does not occur on the Internet (as perhaps suggested by earlier research into the possibilities presented by the Internet) with identity construction still shaped by others. Westfall raises the important, yet rarely discussed, issue of the effects of literacy and communication skills of the online user.” Indeed, these skills or the lack thereof have the capacity to shape one’s online perception as they shape one’s perception through a physical body in the “real world.”

Disembodiment and implications[edit]

This issue of gender and sexual reassignment raises the notion of disembodiment and its associated implications. “Disembodiment” is the idea that once the user is online, the need for the body is no longer required, and the user can participate separately from it. This ultimately relates to a sense of detachment from the identity defined by the physical body. In cyberspace, many aspects of sexual identity become blurred and are only defined by the user. Questions of truth will therefore be raised, particularly in reference to online dating and virtual sex.[citation needed] As McRae states, “Virtual sex allows for a certain freedom of expression, of physical presentation and of experimentation beyond one’s own real-life limits”.[21] At its best, it not only complicates but drastically unsettles the division between mind, body and self in a manner only possible through the construction of an online identity.

Legal and security issues[edit]

Online identity and user’s rights[edit]

The future of online anonymity depends on how an identity management infrastructure is developed.[citation needed] Law enforcement officials often express their opposition to online anonymity and pseudonymity, which they view as an open invitation to criminals who wish to disguise their identities.[original research?] Therefore, they call for an identity management infrastructure that would irrevocably tie online identity to a person’s legal identity[citation needed]]; in most such proposals, the system would be developed in tandem with a secure national identity document. Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, has stated that the Google+ social network is intended to be exactly such an identity system.[28] The controversy resulting from Google+’s policy of requiring users to sign in using legal names has been dubbed the “nymwars”.[29]

Online civil rights advocates, in contrast, argue that there is no need for a privacy-invasive system because technological solutions, such as reputation management systems, are already sufficient and are expected to grow in their sophistication and utility.[citation needed]

Online predators[edit]

Main article: Online predator

An online predator is an Internet user who exploits other users’ vulnerability, often for sexual or financial purposes. It is relatively easy to create an online identity which is attractive to people that would not normally become involved with the predator, but fortunately there are a few means by which you can make sure that a person whom you haven’t met is actually who they say they are. Many people will trust things such as the style in which someone writes, or the photographs someone has on their web page as a way to identify that person, but these can easily be forged. Long-term Internet relationships may sometimes be difficult to sufficiently understand knowing what someone’s identity is actually like.[citation needed]

The most vulnerable age group to online predators is often considered to be young teenagers or older children.[original research?] “Over time – perhaps weeks or even months – the stranger, having obtained as much personal information as possible, grooms the child, gaining his or her trust through compliments, positive statements, and other forms of flattery to build an emotional bond.”[30] The victims often do not suspect anything until it is too late, as the other party usually misleads them to believe that they are of similar age.[citation needed]

The show Dateline on NBC has, overall, conducted three investigations on online predators. They had adults, posing online as teenage juveniles, engage in sexually explicit conversations with other adults (the predators) and arrange to meet them in person. But instead of meeting a teenager, the unsuspecting adult was confronted by Chris Hansen, an NBC News correspondent, arrested, and shown on nationwide television. Dateline held investigations in five different locations apprehending a total of 129 men in all.[31]

Federal laws have been passed in the U.S. to assist the government when trying to catch online predators. Some of these include wiretapping, so online offenders can be caught in advance, before a child becomes a victim.[32] In California, where one Dateline investigation took place, it is a misdemeanor for someone to have sexually-tinged conversations with a child online. The men who came to the house were charged with a felony because their intent was obvious.[citation needed]

The market[edit]

An online identity that has acquired an excellent reputation is valuable for two reasons: first, one or more persons invested a great deal of time and effort to build the identity’s reputation; and second, other users look to the identity’s reputation as they try to decide whether it is sufficiently trustworthy. It is therefore unsurprising that online identities have been put up for sale at online auction sites. However, conflicts arise over the ownership of online identities. Recently, a user of a massively multiplayer online game called EverQuest, which is owned by Sony Online Entertainment, Inc., attempted to sell his EverQuest identity on eBay. Sony objected, asserting that the character is Sony’s intellectual property, and demanded the removal of the auction; under the terms of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), eBay could have become a party to a copyright infringement lawsuit if it failed to comply. Left unresolved is a fundamental question: Who owns an online identity created at a commercial Web site? Does an online identity belong to the person who created it, or to the company that owns the software used to create the identity?[citation needed]

See also[edit]

  • Digital detox
  • Digital identity
  • E-authentication
  • Impression management
  • Münchausen by Internet
  • On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog
  • Online and offline
  • Online diary
  • Online identity management
  • Online identity theft
  • Online reputation
  • Proteus effect
  • Real-name system
  • Sherry Turkle
  • Shibboleth (Internet2)
  • Social web
  • User profile


  • ^ Adams, Suellen (2005). Information Behavior and the Formation and Maintenance of Peer Cultures in Massive Multiplayer Online Roleplaying Games: a Case Study of City of Heroes (PDF). DiGRA: Changing Views – Worlds in Play. Authors & Digital Games research Association (DiGRA). 
  • ^ a b Nabeth, Thierry (26 May 2006). “Understanding the Identity Concept in the Context of Digital Social Environments”. D2.2: Set of use cases and scenarios (PDF). FIDIS Deliverables. 2. FIDIS. pp. 74–91. 
  • ^ “The Many Ways Websites Track You Online”. 
  • ^ Suler, John (2004). “The Online Disinhibition Effect”. CyberPsychology & Behavior. 7 (3): 321–326. doi:10.1089/1094931041291295. Retrieved 10 March 2013. 
  • ^ Marcus, Bernd; Machilek, Franz; Schütz, Astrid (2006). “Personality in cyberspace: Personal web sites as media for personality expressions and impressions”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 90 (6): 1014–1031. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.6.1014. PMID 16784349. 
  • ^ Siibak, Andra (September 2007). Casanovas of the Virtual World. How Boys Present Themselves on Dating Websites. Young People at the Crossroads: 5th International Conference on Youth Research. Petrozavodsk, Republic of Karelia, Russian Federation. pp. 83–91. ISBN 978-952-219-020-8. 
  • ^ Tufekci, Zeynep (February 2008). “Can You See Me Now? Audience and Disclosure Regulation in Online Social Network Sites”. Bulletin of Science Technology & Society. 28 (1): 20–36. doi:10.1177/0270467607311484. 
  • ^ Rodogno, R (2012). “Personal Identity Online”. Philosophy & Technology. 
  • ^ Wiszniewski, Dorian; Coyne, Richard (November 2009) [2002]. “Mask and Identity: The Hermeneutics of Self-Construction in the Information Age”. Building Virtual Communities (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 191–214. ISBN 9780511606373. 
  • ^ Baker, Andrea J. (December 2009). “Mick or Keith: blended identity of online rock fans” (pdf). Identity in the Information Society. Springer (published 2009). 2 (1): 7–21. doi:10.1007/s12394-009-0015-5. 
  • ^ Dennen, Vanessa Paz (December 2009). “Constructing academic alter-egos: identity issues in a blog-based community” (pdf). Identity in the Information Society. Springer (published 2009). 2 (1): 23–38. doi:10.1007/s12394-009-0020-8. 
  • ^ Isaacson, Karen (May 2012). “Human Resources and Social Media” (PDF). KPMG. Retrieved November 20, 2016. 
  • ^ a b Grohol, John M. (4 April 2006). “Anonymity and Online Community: Identity Matters”. A List Apart. ISSN 1534-0295. Archived from the original on 28 September 2008. 
  • ^ “Pseudonyms and True Names: The Sacred Power of Identity”. 24 November 2015. 
  • ^ Chamberlin, W. Sean (December 2001). “Face-to-Face vs. Cyberspace: Finding the Middle Ground”. Campus Technology. Retrieved 10 October 2013. 
  • ^ Eteraz, Ali (30 January 2006). “Online Education Is Not A Fad”. Dean’s World. Dean Esmay. Retrieved 18 July 2006. 
  • ^ Smith, Glenn Gordon; Ferguson, David; Caris, Mieke (2002). “Teaching over the Web versus in the classroom: differences in instructor experience” (PDF). International Journal of Instructional Media. 29 (1): 61–67. Retrieved 10 October 2013. 
  • ^ Holeton, Richard (1998). Composing cyberspace: identity, community, and knowledge in the electronic age. McGraw-Hill. p. 118. ISBN 978-0-07-029548-3. 
  • ^ Stendal, Karen (2012). “How do People with Disability Use and Experience Virtual Worlds and ICT: A Literature Review”. Journal For Virtual Worlds Research. 5 (1). doi:10.4101/jvwr.v5i1.6173. 
  • ^ Bowker, Natilene; Tuffin, Keith (January 2003). “Dicing with Deception: People with Disabilities’ Strategies for Managing Safety and Identity Online”. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 8 (2). doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2003.tb00209.x. 
  • ^ a b McRae, Shannon (1997). “Flesh Made Word: Sex, Text, and the Virtual Body”. In Porter, David. Internet Culture. New York: Routledge. p. 75. 
  • ^ Epstein, Robert (February 2007). “The Truth about Online Dating: The hype is huge, and the findings are somewhat disturbing–but the future of online dating looks good” (PDF). Scientific American Mind. 
  • ^ Hancock, Jeffrey T.; Toma, Catalina; Ellison, Nicole (2007). “The truth about lying in online dating profiles”. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (PDF). CHI 2007. ACM. pp. 449–452. 
  • ^ Learmonth, Michael (2 September 2009). “Want 5,000 More Facebook Friends? That’ll Be $654.30”. AdvertisingAge. New York: Crain Communications. 
  • ^ Van Gelder, Lindsy (1995). Computerization and controversy (2nd ed.). pp. 533–546. ISBN 0-12-415040-3. 
  • ^ Slade, Alison F.; Narro, Amber J.; Buchanan, Burton P. Reality Television: Oddities of Culture. Lexington Books. ISBN 978-0-7391-8564-3. 
  • ^ Banger, Marnie (5 September 2013). “Young ones: your online reputation is, like, forever”. The Sydney Morning Herald. Fairfax Media. 
  • ^ Rosoff, Matt (28 August 2011). “Google+ Isn’t Just A Social Network, It’s An ‘Identity Service'”. San Francisco Chronicle. Hearst Corp. 
  • ^ Jardin, Xeni (12 August 2011). “Google+ nymwars rage on, pseudonymous celebrity users are immune”. Boing Boing. 
  • ^ “Sexual Predators: Know the Enemy”. NetSafeKids. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. 2003. Retrieved 28 May 2008. Over time—perhaps weeks or even months—the stranger, having obtained as much personal information as possible, grooms the child, gaining his or her trust through compliments, positive statements, and other forms of flattery to build an emotional bond. 
  • ^ Hansen, Chris (3 February 2011). To Catch a Predator III. To Catch a Predator. NBC. Retrieved 17 July 2006. 
  • ^ “Internet Laws”. NetSafeKids. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. 2003. Retrieved 17 July 2006. 
  • External links[edit]

    • European Centre for Reputation Studies


    • Social network analysis software
    • Diaspora (software)
    • Web 2.0 Suicide Machine


    • Comparison of software
    • Online identity
    • User profile
    • Virtual community
    • 1+ million users
    • 100+ million users


    • Social network advertising
    • Social network hosting service
    • Online dating service (comparison)
    • Mobile

    User interface

    • Activity stream
    • Brand page
    • Like button
    • Hashtag
    • Groups
    • Reblogging
    • Polling
    • Internet petitions


    • Privacy issues
    • User gender difference
    • Use in investigations

    Related concepts

    • Small-world experiment
    • Small-world network
    • Social network
    • Cybersectarianism
    • Panopticon


    • Micropub
    • Webmention


    • Distributed Social Networking Protocol
    • OpenSocial