10 | My First Time... On Second Life

Playing Second Life for the first time was an interesting experience, seeing what all the hype is about. I felt that the game imposed their own avatars and identities on me right from the registration process. I didn’t feel comfortable picking a preset last name, as I felt it took away my individuality and ability to create my own identity. Further down the registration process, they asked me to chose an initial avatar from a very limited list. None of them looked like me, and most were stereotypical figures such as the goth and night club guy. The only neutral avatars were the boy and girl next door, who were unattractive and dull. I chose the night club guy for two reasons: he looked a little bit like myself and he screamed cool and social, part of what my ideal self tends to be.

As I waited for the software to download, I already felt deindividualized, as I felt my last name “Shmooz” and avatar were simply cookie cutter representations already used by many other players; I like being unique! Once I started playing on tutorial island, I felt separated from my character, thinking to myself how much I really hate the stereotypical night club guy, despite his good looks and extraversion. I distanced myself from the character and avoided interacting with other players, feeling that I would look like an idiot with my LA haircut and designer jeans. I talked to a few people, asking how to do certain things and what was going on. Although I eventually learned that I could alter my avatar, I was turned off from the first 5 minutes of gameplay and not motivated to continue seeking a unique self. I did some more exploring and had a few more trivial conversations. However, by this time in the game I knew I was never going to play again, and thus the social interactions I had wouldn’t matter too much.

According to the Gibbs study, because I didn’t focus on long-term relationships at all, I tended to not self-disclose or be personal; I knew I would never see these virtual people again. Some people approached me and asked how to do a few things like access their inventory. I will admit that I liked being approached, and responded a little more friendlier, but I was still turned off by the game and was most likely perceived as cold and uncaring. Thus, I believe behavioral confirmation played a larger role than did the Proteus Effect. Having other players interact with my attractive character influenced me a lot more than did my character’s appearance: I felt liked when people approached me. This confirmation bias invoked a bit of cognitive dissonance in me as well. Initially I felt distanced from the avatar, but eventually felt happy when people approached me and communicated with them through the character. I felt that behavioral confirmation pulled me closer and closer to my character because I liked when people talked to me, and wanted to act more social than usual. Thus, the character’s looks pulled more people to me, which influenced my behavior, not the character’s appearance.

However, despite my positive feelings from the 3 people that approached me, I still felt overwhelmingly disconnected with night club guy, and never approached too many people, or felt completely conformable with them. My behavior contradicts experiment 1 in the Yee study. My character was attractive and appeared outgoing. However, instead of approaching more people than I usually would and engaging in more conversations, I exhibited more antisocial, apathetic behavior than usual. In most new environments I’m much more willing to approach people and socialize, more confident in my social abilities than I was on Second Life.

My experience conflicts with the Proteus Effect Yee & Bailenson proposed. Aware of the differences in presentation between myself and my character, I refused to conform. I attribute my behavior to SIDE theory, as I felt more anonymous and distanced from my character, rather than trying to converge to his image. However, there was no immediate group identity to conform with. Thus, SIDE concludes my behavior would have less social influence on others, less conformity, and less participation in the online environment. In this sense, SIDE perfectly predicts my behavior compared to the Proteus Effect. I believe that players without such a fear of deindividualism would be more willing to accept their avatar and thus not experience the visual anonymity and distancing from Second Life that I did. Thus, SIDE doesn’t apply to visually identifiable subjects, and may allow the Proteus Effect to take control as observed in the study. Therefore, I believe SIDE and the Proteus Effect both take place, and for most players the SIDE effect is turned off due to visual identifiability, allowing the avatar to control one’s behavior. However, SIDE’s negative influence can override the Proteus Effect as it did for me.

Ultimately, I believe that if the avatar is close enough to one’s persona, the Proteus Effect allows the individual to conform to some aspects through cognitive dissonance, as they don’t feel visually anonymous. However, some people may feel too distanced from their character, and feel anonymous and distanced from the character. Thus, they will not feel the effects of behavioral confirmation or cognitive dissonance because the actions are now attributed to the character, not the user through social distancing from SIDE. This is how I started playing, viewing the character more as a remote control car rather than myself. I was drawn in a bit to embodying his personality from people approaching me, but ultimately I stayed distanced from him and didn’t experience the Proteus Effect.

Comment 1
Comment 2