Avatar driven deception, self disclosure and continuance intention what has self awareness to do with these

AVATAR-DRIVEN DECEPTION, SELF-DISCLOSURE AND CONTINUANCE INTENTION: WHAT HAS SELF-AWARENESS TO DO WITH THESE? ROSALIE HOOI (M.A.) A THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS AND NEW MEDIA NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE 2013 Declaration I hereby declare that this thesis is my original work and it has been written by me in its entirety. I have duly acknowledged all the sources of information which have been used in the thesis. This thesis has also not been submitted for any degree in any university previously. Rosalie Hooi 28th May 2013 Acknowledgements It has been an arduous journey — one that would not have been possible without the support and help from many. I'd like to thank my supervisor Cho Hichang, who gave guidance to this work and provided many useful comments and suggestions to improve it. Thanks go to members of my dissertation committee Fiona Nah and Maria Kozhevnikov for their valuable insight and help. I'm also grateful to Millie Rivera, who was always supportive of the graduate students, and inspired us with her boundless energy and enthusiasm. My appreciation goes to Mel and Little Girl for brightening the dark days. You are pure joy! I am deeply indebted to my encouraging and supportive family — thank-you for everything! — especially Mima, who helped me make time for academic pursuits, and JG, for always going the extra mile for me. To my Grandma, who means the world to me, this is for you! i Table of Contents Abstract iv - v List of Tables List of Figures Introduction Literature review Avatar Deception 12 Self-disclosure 27 Self-awareness 36 Immersion 44 Self-presence 48 Identifiability 50 Continuance intention 52 Hypothesis development Deception model 56 Self-disclosure model 64 Continuance intention model 68 Method Survey 71 Data collection and sample 72 Measures 73 Interviewee selection and procedure 78 Statistical analysis 78 Results Deception model 80 Secondary analysis 83 Self-disclosure model 85 Secondary analysis 87 Continuance intention model 89 Secondary analysis 91 Combined model 92 ii Discussion Deception model 95 Self-disclosure model 101 Continuance intention model 103 General discussion 104 Theoretical contributions 106 Conclusion Practical applications 110 Limitations and future research 112 Concluding remarks 115 Bibliography 117 Appendix 161 iii Abstract The increasing use of virtual worlds for education, entertainment and business, together with the rising popularity of online games have led to a greater familiarity with the use of avatars. Research has demonstrated that avatars can affect users' virtual experience. In particular, self-similar avatars are important to examine as prior research has shown that people tend to create avatars that are similar to themselves. However, it is not known if avatars can influence crucial aspects of behaviour and attitude, such as deception, selfdisclosure and intention to continue use of a medium. These are pertinent in virtual environments as greater honesty and self-disclosure improve the quality of the online experience while continuance intention fosters customer loyalty and helps maintain a substantial user base. This study investigated separately the effect of avatars on deception, self-disclosure and continuance intention. Specifically, it examined the influence of self-similar avatars that people are so apt to create, through mediators like self-awareness, self-presence, identifiability and immersion. In doing so, it contributed to theory-testing, with suggestions for theory-building, expanded the theorisation of the concept of avatar-self similarity and unveiled mechanisms that underlie the relationships. Three research models of deception, self-disclosure and continuance intention were proposed and empirically tested using structural equation modelling. Data was obtained from a web-based survey of 209 users of Second Life, a virtual world that allows people to socialise, as well as create and trade virtual property. Results revealed that avatar-self similarity had varying effects on deception and selfdisclosure depending on the mediators. In the deception model, avatar-self similarity led to greater self-awareness and self-presence, which increased deception. It also brought about iv identifiability, which reduced deception. As well, avatar-self similarity heightened selfawareness and increased self-presence, which encouraged self-disclosure. However, while perceptions of identifiability were stronger with avatar-self similarity, it resulted in less selfdisclosure. In the continuance intention model, avatar-self similarity heightened selfawareness and increased immersion, which intensified the intention to continue use of the medium. The exploration of underlying mechanisms by which avatars affect behaviours and attitude brought about a better understanding of the intricate interplay of effects. While the empirical findings validated the models, the study also made some valuable theoretical contributions. It showed that in virtual environments, self-presence may be an important construct to consider in self-awareness theory, pushed the theorisation of avatar-self similarity and revealed important mediating relationships. It also surfaced the impact of the mediators and their roles in the relationship between avatars and deception, self-disclosure and continuance intention. The models proposed can be applied to other avatar-driven virtual environments and serve as a framework for further investigation of these behaviours and attitude. The findings have some implications for the improvement of virtual environments and user experience through the mediators identified. While some are practical applications, others are suggestions for practitioners to reduce undesirable behaviours, like deception. Finally, the limitations of the study are discussed and suggestions made for future research. v List of Tables Table Model fit indices for deception model 82 Table Model fit indices for self-disclosure model 86 Table Model fit indices for continuance intention model 90 Table Model fit indices for revised continuance intention model 91 Table Model fit indices for combined model 93 List of Figures Figure Research model for deception 64 Figure Research model for self-disclosure 67 Figure Research model for continuance intention 70 Figure Results of SEM analysis for deception model 83 Figure Results of SEM analysis for self-disclosure model 87 Figure Results of SEM analysis for revised continuance intention model 92 Figure Results of SEM analysis for combined model 94 INTRODUCTION Several years ago a young girl joined the group I was in and a few days later admitted that "she" was an underage boy from the Teen Grid. He wouldn't leave when I asked him to, so I let the group leaders know and they ejected him. Two days later, another young girl joined the group, with a similar name and mannerisms. When I challenged her, the group leaders made her say something on voice, and she spoke a few words. A few days later, she and I were talking and "she" admitted being the same underage boy, using a disguised voice. This time the group leaders wouldn't eject him. He may be a fine upstanding resident these days, but I would never trust him again, because he lied to get what he wanted. ~ GreenLantern Excelsior (2013) The above anecdote echoes a behaviour prevalent in daily situations and online encounters. People lie for a variety of reasons which could either be self- or other-oriented. In online environments, lies may be more difficult to identify due to the lack of auditory and behavioural cues which are generally relied on. In the anecdote, the underaged boy outted himself but had he not done so, none would have been any wiser. The use of an avatar complicates deception detection as people tend to take the avatar at face value (Dumitrica & Gaden, 2009; Martey & Consalvo, 2011), are unable to make demeanour judgements (Ekman & O'Sullivan, 1991) and get distracted by the avatar (Galanxhi & Nah, 2007). However, what is worse than the duplicity itself is the loss of trust. The relationship of GreenLantern Excelsior and the underaged boy cannot progress beyond a superficial acquaintanceship because he would not be able to trust the boy with any self-disclosing information that can lead to stronger bonds or a personal relationship. Encompassing some of the issues highlighted, the aim of this study is to examine the effect of avatars on deception, self-disclosure and continuance intention. Specifically, the Proyer, R. T. (2012). Examining playfulness in adults: Testing its correlates with personality, positive psychological functioning, goal aspirations, and multi-methodically assessed ingenuity. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 54(2), 103. Pryor, J. B., Gibbons, F. X., Wicklund, R. A., Fazio, R. H., & Hood, R. (1977). Self-focused attention and self-report validity. Journal of Personality, 45(4), 513-527. Qian, H., & Scott, C. R. (2007). Anonymity and self-disclosure on weblogs. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), article 14. Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue4/qian.html Quattrone, G. A., & Jones, E. E. (1978). Selective self-disclosure with and without correspondent performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14(6), 511526. Raessens, J. (2006). Playful identities, or the ludification of culture. Games and Culture, 1(1), 52-57. Raphael, B. (1977). Preventive Intervention With the Recently Bereaved. Archives of General Psychiatry, 34(12), 1450-1454. Ratan, R., & Hasler, B. S. (2010). Exploring Self-Presence in Collaborative Virtual Teams. PsychNology Journal, 8(1), 11-31. Ratan, R., Santa Cruz, M., & Vorderer, P. (2008). Multitasking, presence, and self-presence on the Wii. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 10th Annual International Workshop on Presence, Barcelona, Spain. Robbins, J. M., & Krueger, J. I. (2005). Social projection to ingroups and outgroups: A review and meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9(1), 32-47. Rogers, E. M., & Bhowmik, D. K. (1970). Homophily-heterophily: Relational concepts for communication research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 34(4), 523-538. 148 Rosenfeld, L. B. (1979). Self-Disclosure Avoidance: Why I Am Afraid to Tell You Who I Am. Communication Monographs, 46(1), 63-74. Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977). The “false consensus effect”: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13(3), 279-301. Ross, L., & Ward, A. (1995). Psychological Barriers to Dispute Resolution. In P. Z. Mark (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. Volume 27, pp. 255-304): Academic Press. Sattler, J. M. (1970). Racial" experimenter effects" in experimentation, testing, interviewing, and psychotherapy. Psychological Bulletin, 73(2), 137-160. Scheier, M., & Carver, C. (1977). Self-focused attention and the experience of emotion: Attraction, repulsion, elation, and depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(9), 625-636. Scheier, M., Carver, C., & Gibbons, F. (1979). Self-directed attention, awareness of bodily states, and suggestibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(9), 15761588. Scheier, M. F. (1976). Self-awareness, self-consciousness, and angry aggression. Journal of Personality, 44(4), 627-644. Scheier, M. F. (1980). Effects of public and private self-consciousness on the public expression of personal beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(3), 514-521. Scheier, M. F., Buss, A. H., & Buss, D. M. (1978). Self-consciousness, self-report of aggressiveness, and aggression. Journal of Research in Personality, 12(2), 133-140. 149 Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1980). Private and Public Self-Attention, Resistance to Change, and Dissonance Reduction. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 39(3), 390-405. Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1983). Self-directed attention and the comparison of self with standards. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19(3), 205-222. Scheier, M. F., Fenigstein, A., & Buss, A. H. (1974). Self awareness and physical aggression. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10(3), 264-273. Schneider, E. F., Lang, A., Shin, M., & Bradley, S. D. (2004). Death with a story: How story impacts emotional, motivational, and physiological responses to first-person shooter video games. Human Communication Research, 30(3), 361-375. Schweitzer, M. E., DeChurch, L. A., & Gibson, D. E. (2006). Conflict Frames and the Use of Deception: Are Competitive Negotiators Less Ethical? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35(10), 2123-2149. Scott, C. R. (2004). Benefits and drawbacks of anonymous online communication: Legal challenges and communicative recommendations. In S. Drucker (Ed.), Free Speech Yearbook (Vol. 41, pp. 127-141). Washington, DC: National Communication Association. Selfhout, M., Denissen, J., Branje, S., & Meeus, W. (2009). In the Eye of the Beholder: Perceived, Actual, and Peer-Rated Similarity in Personality, Communication, and Friendship Intensity During the Acquaintanceship Process. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 96(6), 1152-1165. Shaver, P. R., & Hazan, C. (1988). A Biased Overview of the Study of Love. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 5(4), 473-501. 150 Shaver, P. R., Lavy, S., Saron, C. D., & Mikulincer, M. (2007). Social Foundations of the Capacity for Mindfulness: An Attachment Perspective. Psychological Inquiry, 18(4), 264-271. Shen, J., & Eder, L. B. (2009). Exploring intentions to use virtual worlds for business. Journal of electronic commerce research, 10(2), 94-103. Sheridan, T. B. (2000). Interaction, imagination and immersion: Some research needs. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the ACM symposium on Virtual reality software and technology. Sherman, R. C., End, C., Kraan, E., Cole, A., Campbell, J., Klausner, J., et al. (2001). Metaperception in cyberspace. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 4(1), 123-129. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7(4), 422-445. Shweder, R. A. (1990). Cultural psychology: What is it? In J. W. Stigler, R. A. Shweder & G. H. Herdt (Eds.), Cultural psychology: Essays on comparative human development (pp. 1-43): Cambridge University Press. Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., & McGuire, T. W. (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37(2), 157-187. Skalski, P., Tamborini, R., Shelton, A., Buncher, M., & Lindmark, P. (2011). Mapping the road to fun: Natural video game controllers, presence, and game enjoyment. New Media & Society, 13(2), 224-242. Slater, M. (1999). Measuring presence: A response to the Witmer and Singer presence questionnaire. Presence, 8(5), 560-565. 151 Slater, M., McCarthy, J., & Maringelli, F. (1998). The Influence of Body Movement on Subjective Presence in Virtual Environments. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 40(3), 469-477. Slater, M., & Usoh, M. (1994). Body Centred Interaction in Immersive Virtual Environments. In N. M. Thalmann & D. Thalmann (Eds.), Artificial life and virtual reality (pp. 125147). Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons. Slater, M., Usoh, M., & Chrysanthou, Y. (1995). The Influence of Dynamic Shadows on Presence in Immersive Virtual Environments. In M. Goebel (Ed.), Virtual Environments ’95 (pp. 8-21): Springer-Verlag. Solomon, M. R., & Schopler, J. (1982). Self-Consciousness and Clothing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8(3), 508-514. Sommer, R. (1974). Tight spaces; hard architecture and how to humanize it. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Sprecher, S. (1987). The Effects of Self-Disclosure Given and Received on Affection for an Intimate Partner and Stability of the Relationship. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 4(2), 115-127. Sproull, H. L., & Kiesler, S. (1991). Computers, networks and work. Scientific American, 265 (3), 116-123. Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32(11), 1492-1512. Steinel, W., Utz, S., & Koning, L. (2010). The good, the bad and the ugly thing to when sharing information: Revealing, concealing and lying depend on social motivation, distribution and importance of information. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 113(2), 85-96. 152 Steuer, J. (1992). Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42(4), 73-93. Stiff, J. B. (1996). Theoretical Approaches to the Study of Deceptive Communication: Comments on Interpersonal Deception Theory. Communication Theory, 6(3), 289296. Strauss, J. P., Barrick, M. R., & Connerley, M. L. (2001). An investigation of personality similarity effects (relational and perceived) on peer and supervisor ratings and the role of familiarity and liking. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74(5), 637-657. Suh, K. S., Kim, H., & Suh, E. K. (2011). What If Your Avatar Looks Like You? DualCongruity Perspectives for Avatar Use. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 35(3), 711-729. Suh, K. S., & Lee, Y. E. (2005). The effects of virtual reality on consumer learning: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 29(4), 673-697. Suler, J. (1996). The psychology of avatars and graphical space in multimedia chat communities. Retrieved November, 2009, from http://www.rider.edu/users/suler/psycyber/psyav.html Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 7(3), 321326. Suls, J. (Ed.). (1993). Psychological perspectives on the self. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Sundstrom, E. (1975). An experimental study of crowding: Effects of room size, intrusion, and goal blocking on nonverbal behavior, self-disclosure, and self-reported stress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(4), 645. 153 Tamborini, R., & Bowman, N. D. (2010). Presence in Video Games. In C. C. Bracken & P. D. Skalski (Eds.), Immersed in media: Telepresence in everyday life (pp. 87-110). New York: Routledge. Tamborini, R., & Skalski, P. (2006). The role of presence in the experience of electronic games. In P. Vorderer & J. Bryant (Eds.), Playing video games: Motives, responses, and consequences (pp. 225-240). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Tardy, C. H., & Dindia, K. (2006). Self-disclosure: Strategic revelation of information in personal and professional relationships. In O. Hargie (Ed.), The handbook of communication skills (3rd ed., pp. 229-266). New York: Routledge. Taylor, D. A., Altman, I., & Sorrentino, R. (1969). Interpersonal exchange as a function of rewards and costs and situational factors: Expectancy confirmation-disconfirmation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 5(3), 324-339. Taylor, T. L. (2003). Multiple Pleasures. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 9(1), 21-46. Tenbrunsel, A. E. (1998). Misrepresentation and Expectations of Misrepresentation in an Ethical Dilemma: The Role of Incentives and Temptation. The Academy of Management Journal, 41(3), 330-339. Tesser, A. (1988). Toward a self-evaluation maintenance model of social behavior. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 21, pp. 181-228). New York: Academic Press. Tesser, A., Millar, M., & Moore, J. (1988). Some Affective Consequences of Social Comparison and Reflection Processes: The Pain and Pleasure of Being Close. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 54(1), 49-61. Tesser, A., & Paulhus, D. (1983). The definition of self: Private and public self-evaluation management strategies. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 44(4), 672-682. 154 Thong, J. Y. L., Hong, S. J., & Tam, K. Y. (2006). The effects of post-adoption beliefs on the expectation-confirmation model for information technology continuance. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(9), 799-810. Tidwell, L., & Walther, J. (2002). Computer-mediated communication effects on disclosure, impressions, and interpersonal evaluations: Getting to know one another a bit at a time. Human Communication Research, 28(3), 317-348. Todorov, A. (2008). Evaluating Faces on Trustworthiness. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1124(1), 208-224. Toma, C. L., Hancock, J. T., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Separating Fact From Fiction: An Examination of Deceptive Self-Presentation in Online Dating Profiles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(8), 1023-1036. Trepte, S., & Reinecke, L. (2010). Avatar creation and video game enjoyment. Journal of Media Psychology, 22(4), 171-184. Trepte, S., Reinecke, L., & Behr, K. M. (2009). Creating virtual alter egos or superheroines?: Gamers' strategies of avatar creation in terms of gender and sex. International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations, 1(2), 52-76. Trevino, L. K., & Youngblood, S. A. (1990). Bad apples in bad barrels: A causal analysis of ethical decision-making behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology; Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(4), 378-385. Turban, D. B., & Jones, A. P. (1988). Supervisor-Subordinate Similarity: Types, Effects, and Mechanisms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(2), 228-234. Turkle, S. (1994). Constructions and reconstructions of self in virtual reality: Playing in the MUDs. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 1(3), 158-167. Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. New York: Simon & Schuster. 155 Turner, R. G. (1980). Self-Consciousness and Memory of Trait Terms. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6(2), 273-277. Utz, S. (2005). Types of Deception and Underlying Motivation: What People Think. Social Science Computer Review, 23(1), 49-56. Valacich, J. S., Jessup, L. M., Dennis, A. R., & Nunamaker, J. (1992). A conceptual framework of anonymity in group support systems. Group Decision and Negotiation, 1(3), 219-241. Valley, K. L., Moag, J., & Bazerman, M. H. (1998). "A matter of trust": Effects of communication on the efficiency and distribution of outcomes. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 34(2), 211-238. Van Boven, L., & Loewenstein, G. (2003). Social projection of transient drive states. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(9), 1159-1168. Vasalou, A., & Joinson, A. N. (2009). Me, myself and I: The role of interactional context on self-presentation through avatars. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 510-520. Vasalou, A., Joinson, A. N., & Pitt, J. (2007). Constructing my online self: Avatars that increase self-focused attention. Paper presented at the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., & Ackerman, P. L. (2000). A longitudinal field investigation of gender differences in individual technology adoption decision-making processes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 83(1), 33-60. Vereecken, C. A., & Maes, L. (2006). Comparison of a computer-administered and paperand-pencil-administered questionnaire on health and lifestyle behaviors. Journal of Adolescent Health, 38(4), 426-432. Visch, V. T., Tan, E. S., & Molenaar, D. (2010). The emotional and cognitive effect of immersion in film viewing. Cognition & Emotion, 24(8), 1439-1445. 156 Vrij, A. (2007). Deception: a social lubricant and a selfish act. In K. Fiedler (Ed.), Social communication (pp. 309-342). New York: Psychology Press. Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities (2nd ed.). Chichester ; Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley. Vrij, A., Edward, K., & Bull, R. (2001). People's insight into their own behaviour and speech content while lying. British Journal of Psychology, 92(2), 373-389. Vrij, A., & Holland, M. (1998). Individual differences in persistence in lying and experiences while deceiving. Communication Research Reports, 15(3), 299-308. Vrij, A., & Mann, S. (2001). Who killed my relative? Police officers' ability to detect real-life high-stake lies. Psychology, Crime and Law, 7(2), 119-132. Vroom, V. H. (1967). Work and motivation (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley. Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3-43. Waskul, D., & Douglass, M. (1997). Cyberself: The emergence of self in on-line chat. Information Society, 13(4), 375-397. Watson, D. (1989). Strangers' ratings of the five robust personality factors: Evidence of a surprising convergence with self-report. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(1), 120-128. Waxer, P. H. (1977). Nonverbal cues for anxiety: an examination of emotional leakage. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 86(3), 306-314. Webb, W., Marsh, K., Schneiderman, W., & Davis, B. (1989). Interaction between selfmonitoring and manipulated states of self-awareness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(1), 70-80. 157 Wei, M., Russell, D. W., & Zakalik, R. A. (2005). Adult attachment, social self-efficacy, selfdisclosure, loneliness, and subsequent depression for freshman college students: A longitudinal study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(4), 602-614. Weisband, S., & Kiesler, S. (1996). Self disclosure on computer forms: meta-analysis and implications. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: common ground. Weiss, B., & Feldman, R. S. (2006). Looking Good and Lying to Do It: Deception as an Impression Management Strategy in Job Interviews. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(4), 1070-1086. West, L. W. (1971). A study of the vaiidity of the Self-disclosure Inventory for Adolescents. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 33(1), 91-100. Wheeless, L. R. (1976). Self-disclosure and interpersonal solidarity: Measurement, validation, and relationships. Human Communication Research, 3(1), 47-61. Wheeless, L. R., & Grotz, J. (1976). Conceptualization and measurement of reported selfdisclosure. Human Communication Research, 2(4), 338-346. Whelan, T. J., & Thompson, L. F. (2009). Development/validation of the PANON scale assessing survey anonymity perceptions. Paper presented at the Paper presented at the 24th annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Whitty, M. T. (2002). Liar, liar! An examination of how open, supportive and honest people are in chat rooms. Computers in Human Behavior, 18(4), 343-352. Whitty, M. T. (2008). Liberating or debilitating? An examination of romantic relationships, sexual relationships and friendships on the Net. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1837-1850. Wicklund, R. A. (1975). Objective self-awareness. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 233-275). New York: Academic Press. 158 Wicklund, R. A., & Duval, S. (1971). Opinion change and performance facilitation as a result of objective self-awareness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 7(3), 319342. Williams, K. D. (2011). The effects of homophily, identification, and violent video games on players. Mass Communication and Society, 14(1), 3-24. Williams, R. (1988). Reflections on anonymity. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 67(3), 763-766. Willis, J., & Todorov, A. (2006). First Impressions: Making Up Your Mind After a 100-Ms Exposure to a Face. Psychological Science, 17(7), 592-598. Witmer, B., & Singer, M. (1998). Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence, 7(3), 225-240. Worthy, M., Gary, A. L., & Kahn, G. M. (1969). Self-disclosure as an exchange process. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 13(1), 59-63. Yao, M. Z., & Flanagin, A. J. (2006). A self-awareness approach to computer-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(3), 518-544. Yee, N. (2006). Motivations for Play in Online Games. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9(6), 772-775. Yee, N., & Bailenson, J. (2007). The Proteus Effect: The Effect of Transformed SelfRepresentation on Behavior. Human Communication Research, 33(3), 271–290. Yee, N., Bailenson, J. N., & Ducheneaut, N. (2009). The Proteus Effect: Implications of transformed digital self-representation on online and offline behavior. Communication Research, 36(2), 285-312. Yee, N., Bailenson, J. N., Urbanek, M., Chang, F., & Merget, D. (2007). The Unbearable Likeness of Being Digital: The Persistence of Nonverbal Social Norms in Online Virtual Environments. Journal of CyberPsychology and Behavior, 10, 115-121. 159 Zhao, X., Lynch, John G. J., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths about Mediation Analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197-206. Zhong, C. B., Bohns, V., & Gino, F. (2010). Good lamps are the best police: Darkness increases dishonesty and self-interested behavior. Psychological Science, 21(3), 311314. Zhou, L., Burgoon, J. K., Nunamaker, J. F., Jr, & Twitchell, D. P. (2004). Automating Linguistics-Based cues for detecting deception in Text-Based asynchronous Computer-Mediated communications. Group Decision and Negotiation, 13(1), 81106. Zuckerman, M., DePaulo, B. M., & Rosenthal, R. (1981). Verbal and nonverbal communication of deception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 14, pp. 2-60). New York: Academic Press. 160 Appendix Survey items, reliabilities and descriptive statistics α .87 M 3.05 SD 1.12 Homophily My avatar in Second Life . HM1 thinks like me. HM2 behaves like me. HM3 has thoughts and ideas that are similar to mine. HM4 is like me. HM5 shares my values. HM6 has a lot in common with me. HM7 is similar to me. .87 1.53 .61 Self-awareness When I am using my avatar in Second Life, I am . SA1 more conscious of my inner feelings. SA2 reflective about my life. SA3 aware of my innermost thoughts. .75 1.82 .80 Identifiability ID1 I am indistinguishable from others in Second Life.* ID2 I am unidentifiable from others in Second Life.* ID3 I blend in with other people in Second Life.* .70 3.37 1.04 Self-presence SP1 When something happens to your avatar's body, to what extent does it feel like it is happening to any part of your body? .85 3.40 1.02 .84 2.94 .94 Construct and Measurement Items Appearance Similarity To what extent is your avatar in Second Life similar to your real self in the following dimensions? AS1 Overall AS2 Body AS3 Weight AS4. Overall, would you say that your primary avatar in Second Life is: - As close to your real self as can be made - Generally recognisable as your real self - A mix of similar and unrecognisable features to your real self - Mostly not recognisable as your real self - As far from your real self as can be made While using Second Life, how much did you feel as if . SP2 you were moving when your avatar moved (e.g. as in flying or dancing)? SP3 your avatar were an extension of your body within the virtual environment? SP4 When something happens to your avatar, to what extent does it feel like it is happening to you? SP5 While using Second Life, how much did you feel as if you were walking when your avatar walked? Immersion IM1 While using Second Life, to what extent did you feel surrounded by the virtual environment? IM2 While using Second Life, to what extent did you feel like 161 IM3 IM4 IM5 you were inside the virtual environment? While using Second Life, to what extent did you feel that the virtual environment seemed to be "somewhere I visited" rather than "something I saw"? While using Second Life, to what extent were there times when the virtual world became the "reality" for you, and you almost forgot about the "real world" where you physically are? While using Second Life, to what extent did you feel immersed in the virtual environment? Deception While speaking to a stranger in Second Life, have you . DE1 lied about your occupation? DE2 lied about your interests (e.g., hobbies, religious orientation, musical preferences)? DE3 lied about your real-life marital status? DE4 exaggerated or lied about your abilities? DE5 misrepresented yourself in any other way? .86 4.53 .64 Self-disclosure To what extent have you disclosed the following to a stranger in Second Life? SD1 My personal habits. SD2 Things I have done which I feel guilty about. SD3 My deepest feelings. SD4 What I like and dislike about myself. SD5 What is important to me in life. SD6 What makes me the person I am. SD7 My worst fears. SD8 My close relationships with other people. .91 3.15 .94 Continuance intention CI1 I am likely to continue using Second Life in the next six months. CI2 I am likely to choose Second Life the next time I visit a virtual world. CI3 I presently intend to use Second Life regularly. .84 1.28 .56 * indicates reverse coding Correlations of constructs and Average Variance Extracted Construct Appearance similarity Appearance similarity .88 Homophily .16 .79 Selfawareness .06 .38 .79 Identifiability .04 -.22 -.08 .76 Selfpresence .02 .13 .34 -.03 Immersion .02 .13 .34 Deception -.03 -.20 -.12 Homophily Selfawareness Identifiability Selfpresence Immersion Deception .79 .80 .32 162 .29 .81 Selfdisclosure Continuance intention Selfdisclosure Continuance intention -.01 .06 -.23 .04 .23 .17 .15 .40 .86 .33 Diagonal represents Square Root of Average Variance Extracted 163 .88 [...]... seeks to find out how self- similar avatars can affect deception, selfdisclosure and continuance intention through the intervening variables of self- awareness, self- presence, immersion and identifiability To achieve this objective, the study proposes three models with avatar similarity as antecedent and separate outcomes of deception, self- disclosure and continuance intention In both the deception and self- disclosure. .. self- disclosure models, self- awareness, self- presence and 4 identifiability are intervening factors while in the continuance intention model, selfawareness and immersion are advanced as the intervening variables Generally, avatar similarity should heighten self- awareness While self- awareness is expected to reduce deception and encourage self- disclosure, it is also postulated to increase self- presence and. .. an effect brought on by selfawareness and immersion — two of the factors that could mediate the relationship between avatar and behaviour To better understand how avatars can affect user behaviours/attitude of deception, self- disclosure and continuance intention, intervening variables that help explain the relationships will be explored Drawing from self- awareness theory, self- awareness, or 3 attention... on self- similar avatars as people tend to create avatars that are like themselves (Messinger et al., 2008), and investigates the underlying mechanisms through which they affect deception, self- disclosure and continuance intention With the prevalent use of avatars in an ever-expanding range of activities, like education and training, online business and ehealth, this is an area that is both crucial and. .. them to experience self- presence, where the virtual self is perceived as the real self, and immersion, where one feels surrounded by the virtual environment Thus, the theoretical notions of selfpresence and immersion are incorporated in this research as well The concept of selfawareness is central to this study as it connects avatar similarity to the outcomes of deception, self- disclosure and continuance. .. from the perspective of user intention to deceive (Galanxhi & Nah, 2007) or tend to be descriptive in nature (e.g., Boellstorff, 2008) Relatedly, self- disclosure is examined as it is conceptually linked to deception Selfdisclosure entails a certain degree of honesty since to self- disclose is to reveal previously unknown personal information about the self to others Self- disclosure also serves as a primary... an avatardriven environment, and to add novel factors like self- presence, which has not been studied in the context of deception and self- disclosure Previous research has also not sufficiently theorised the notion of avatar similarity, which this study will further push A test of the research models should advance our understanding of the complex and multi-faceted relationship avatar construction has. .. has with behaviour and attitude In specifying the conditions under which avatar similarity would have different valenced effects on deception, self- disclosure and continuance intention, the study can surface the different influences and processes, outlining the mechanisms through which avatar affects these behaviours and attitude It is envisaged that the models may be applicable to other avatardriven... lives creating avatars similar to themselves in personality while dissatisfied users created dissimilar avatars (Trepte & Reinecke, 2010) Users with lower psychological well-being have a greater tendency to create avatars that are more similar to their ideal self and with more favourable attributes (Bessière, et al., 2007) Personality factors and self- esteem were found to have some effect on avatar creation... the other hand, people using self- similar avatars were found to be more strongly influenced when exposed to violence due to homophily and identification with the avatar For example, in a violent game, people who made use of physically similar avatars were found to be more hostile (Williams, 2011) Having a same gender avatar also led to more aggressive thoughts (Eastin, 2006) A self- similar avatar may . AVATAR- DRIVEN DECEPTION, SELF- DISCLOSURE AND CONTINUANCE INTENTION: WHAT HAS SELF- AWARENESS TO DO WITH THESE? ROSALIE HOOI (M.A.) . deception, self- disclosure and continuance intention. In both the deception and self- disclosure models, self- awareness, self- presence and 5 identifiability are intervening factors while in the continuance. of the mediators and their roles in the relationship between avatars and deception, self- disclosure and continuance intention. The models proposed can be applied to other avatar- driven virtual