Disembodiment of Internet Users as a Consequence of Modern Information Technologies and Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Students
https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2022-24-4-504-516
Abstract
This article focuses on the concept of disembodied Internet personality. The Internet gives its users a special disembodied status because mental self of the Internet user has no physical manifestation. Although this concept appears in many studies, it remains practically unexplored in psychological terms. However, British existential psychologist R. Laing already described its varieties and consequences on clinical material. His The Divided Self: An Existential Study In Sanity And Madness became a theoretical foundation of virtual disembodiment and a questionnaire of the same name. In this article, R. Laing’s ideas were compared with the socio-cognitive concept of self-efficacy, which was developed by A.Bandura and then modified by R. Schwarzer and M. Jerusalem, who also designed the scale of general self-efficiency. This research used both the scale of general selfefficiency and the questionnaire of Internet disembodiment to establish the relationship between various aspects of the Self. The research featured the self-perception of technological disembodiment and the subjective sense of social vitality and capacity in university students during the development of their first integral form of identity. The artificial separation of the mental Self from the physical body in the virtual environment weakened their beliefs in personal efficacy outside the virtual space. Students with different severity of online disembodiment and general self-efficacy appeared to have different self-identification features.
Keywords
Supporting agencies: The study was funded by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, project No. 19-29-07046.
About the Authors
N. V. Kopteva
Perm State Humanitarian-Pedagogical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Perm
A. Yu. Kalugin
Perm State Humanitarian-Pedagogical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Perm
L. Ya. Dorfman
Perm State Institute of Culture
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Perm
References
1. Belinskaya E. P. Man in the information world. Social psychology in the modern world, eds. Andreeva G. M., Dontsov A. I. Moscow: Aspekt Press, 2002, 203–220. (In Russ.)
2. Voiskunsky A. E. Psychology and the Internet. Moscow: Akropol, 2010, 439. (In Russ.)
3. Demilkhanova A. M. The effect of virtual reality on the image of Self in role-playing computer games. Cand. Psychol. Sci. Diss. Abstr. Yaroslavl, 2009, 24. (In Russ.)
4. Emelin V. A. Simulacra and virtualization technologies in information society. Natsional’nyy psikhologocheskiy zhurnal, 2016, (3): 86–97. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.11621/npj.2016.031
5. Mararitsa L. V., Antonova N. A., Eritsyan K. Yu. Internet communication: potential threat or resources for a person. Peterburgskii psikhologicheskii zhurnal, 2013, (5): 35–49. (In Russ.)
6. Soldatova E. L., Pogorelov D. N. The phenomenon of virtual identity: the contemporary condition of the problem. The Education and Science Journal, 2018, 20(5): 105–124. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2018-5-105-124
7. Chudova N. V. Image of Self in Internet users. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 2002, 23(1): 44–52. (In Russ.)
8. Shabshin I. I. Psychological characteristics of communication on the Internet. Moskovskii psikhoterapevticheskii zhurnal, 2005, (1): 158–182. (In Russ.)
9. Bell D. An introduction to cybercultures. London-NY: Routledge, 2001, 246. 10. Lawson D. M. C. Gary Becker and the quest for the theory of everything. University of Notre Dame, 2004.
10. Marwick A. E. Selling your self: online identity in the age of a commodified internet. Diss. University of Washington, 2005, 188. 12. Munn L. Digital Disembodiment. Master’s thesis, Auckland University of Technology, 2014.
11. Reid E., Deaux K. Relationship between social and personal identities: segregation or integration? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1996, 71(6): 1084–1091. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.6.1084
12. Rheingold H. The virtual community: homesteading on the electronic frontier. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1993, 325.
13. Suler J. R. Identity management in cyberspace. Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies, 2002, 4(4): 455–459.
14. Turkle S. The second self: computers and the human spirit (twentieth anniversary edition). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2005, 387.
15. Turkle S. Life on the screen: identity in the age of the Internet. NY: Simon & Schuster, 1995, 247.
16. Laing R. D. The divided self: an existential study in sanity and madness. Moscow: IOI, 2017, 350. (In Russ.)
17. Kopteva N. V., Kalugin A. Yu., Dorfman L. Ya. Unembodiment on the Internet. Part 1: Theoretical basis and construct. Clinical Psychology and Special Education, 2021, 10(3): 31–48. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17759/cpse.2021100303
18. Kopteva N. V., Kalugin A. Yu., Dorfman L. Ya. Unembodiment in the Internet. Part 2. Psychometric verification of the questionnaire. Clinical Psychology and Special Education, 2021, 10(4): 205–233. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17759/cpse.2021100410
19. Kopteva N. V. Unembodimetnt on the Internet as a predictor of the loss of meaning (a study of university students). World of Science. Pedagogy and psychology, 2020, 4(8). (In Russ.) URL: https://mir-nauki.com/PDF/62PSMN420.pdf (accessed 15 Feb 2022).
20. Kopteva N. V. Disembodiment on the Internet as a new form of technological self-alienation (based on the study of students of humanitarian institutes of higher education). Bulletin of Udmurt University. Series Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy, 2021, 31(2): 160–169. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.35634/2412-9550-2021-31-2-160-169
21. Kopteva N. V. Disembodiment and changes of psychological borders as the effects of normative use of information technologies. Message 1. Pedagogical Review, 2021, (4): 221–228. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.23951/2307-6127-2021-4-221-228
22. Dorfman L. Ya., Kalugin A. Yu. Individual-intellectual integration of a person. Moscow: IP RAS, 2021, 279. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.38098/mng_21_0438
23. Yurevich A. V. Psychology and methodology. Moscow: IP RAS, 2005, 312. (In Russ.)
24. Emelin V. A., Rasskazova E. I., Tkhostov A. Sh. Development and validation of the technique for measurement of changes of psychological boundaries while using technical devices (TPB-TD). Psychological Studies, 2012, (2). (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.54359/ps.v5i22.782
25. Rasskazova E. I., Emelin V. A., Tkhostov A. Sh. Diagnostics of psychological effects of the impact of information technologies on a person: a teaching guide for psychology students. Moscow: Akropol, 2015, 115. (In Russ.)
26. Marcel G. Being and having. Novocherkassk: Saguna, 1994, 159. (In Russ.)
27. Horujy S. S. Gender or pre-gender? Notes on the ontology of the virtual. Voprosy Filosofii, 1997, (6): 53–68. (In Russ.)
28. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychologocal Review, 1977, 84(2): 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
29. Bandura A. The self system in reciprocal determinism. American Psychologist, 1978, 33(4): 344–358. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.33.4.344
30. Cloninger S. Theories of personality: understanding persons. 3rd ed. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2003, 720. (In Russ.)
31. Schwarzer R., Jerusalem M. Measurement of perceived self-efficacy: psychometric scales for cross-cultural research. Berlin: Freie Universitat, 1993, 45.
32. Binswanger L. Being-in-the-world. Moscow: KSP+; St. Petersburg: Yuventa, 1999, 300. (In Russ.)
33. Bandura A. Exercise of personal and collective efficacy in changing societies. Self-efficacy in changing societies, ed. Bandura A. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995, 1–45. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511527692.003
34. Bandura A. Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 1982, 37(2): 122–147. https://doi. org/10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122
35. Cheshire N., Thomae H. Rehabilitation of Self. Moskovskii psikhoterapevticheskii zhurnal, 1996, (4): 23–37. (In Russ.)
36. Baudrillard J. The transparency of evil. Moscow: Dobrosvet; KDU, 2009, 257. (In Russ.)
37. Erikson E. Erik Erikson’s philosophical plots: translated works. Moscow: Kanon+, 2017, 416. (In Russ.)
38. Giddens A. Modernity and self-identity: self and society in the Late Modern Age. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991, 256.
39. Romek W. G., Schwarzer R., Jerusalem M. Russian version of the general self-efficiency scale by R. Schwarzer and M. Jerusalem. Inostrannaia psikhologiia, 1996, (7): 71–77. (In Russ.)
40. George D., Mallery P. IBM SPSS statistics. 23 step by step: a simple guide and reference. NY: Routledge, 2016, 386.
41. Adler A. Individual psychology. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2017, 256. (In Russ.)
42. Jung C. G. Problems of the soul of our time. Moscow: Progress; Univers, 1993, 336. (In Russ.)
43. Bayeva L. V. Existential risks of the information age. Information Society, 2013, (3): 18–27. (In Russ.)
44. Zinchenko V. P., Podoroga V. A. Human soul and flesh: Proceedings of the scientific-practical conference "Interdisciplinary Issues of the Psychology of Corporeality" (October 2004) at the Moscow University for the Humanities. Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie, 2005, (1): 34–43. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Kopteva N.V., Kalugin A.Yu., Dorfman L.Ya. Disembodiment of Internet Users as a Consequence of Modern Information Technologies and Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Students. The Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. 2022;24(4):504-516. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2022-24-4-504-516
Views:
309
Email this article 