Research into how online avatars are used has mostly concentrated on the agentic user controlling the passive avatar. With the proliferation, variety, and increasing uptake of online representations now available to individuals, however, we might more productively examine the relationship between what I call the avatar-persona and the user as one in which the avatar-persona also plays a part. Due to the affordances of parasociality and self-presence, a dialectic interaction develops between the user and the avatar as extended and extraordinary self. This dialectic enables the avatar-persona to express a certain degree of influence over the user in some circumstances. My discussion of these dynamics is illustrated from observations made during an extended participant observation in a multi-user virtual environment Second Life.
BailensonJ. N.SegoviaK. Y. (2010). Virtual doppelgangers: Psychological effects of avatars who ignore their owners. In W. S. Bainbridge (Ed.), Online worlds: Convergence of the real and the virtual (pp. 175–186). London: Springer-Verlag.
2.
Behm-MorawitzE. (2013).
Mirrored selves: The influence of self-presence in a virtual world on health, appearance, and well-being. Computers in Human Behavior,
29(1), 119–128.
3.
BelkR. W. (1988).
Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research,
15(2), 139–168.
4.
BelkR. W. (2013).
Extended self in a digital world. Journal of Consumer Research,
40(3), 477–500.
5.
BioccaF. (1997).
The cyborg’s dilemma: Progressive embodiment in virtual environments. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication,
3(2), 12–26.
6.
BoellstroffT. (2008). Coming of age in second life: An anthropologist explores the virtually human.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
7.
DeFrietasS.VeletsianosG. (2010).
Editorial: Crossing boundaries: Learning and teaching in virtual worlds. British Journal of Educational Technology,
41(1), 3–9.
8.
FoxJ.BailensonJ. N. (2009).
Virtual self-modelling: The effects of vicarious reinforcement and identification on exercise behaviors. Media Psychology,
12(1), 1–25.
9.
GalatiG. (2012).
Presence, telepresence, images and the self. Technoetic Arts,
9(2), 129–134.
10.
GazzardA. (2009). The avatar and the player: Understanding the relationship beyond the screen [Paper presentation]. Conference in Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious Applications (pp. 190–193). IEEE.
11.
GellA. (1998). Art and agency: An anthropological theory.
University Press.
12.
GilbertR.ThadaniV.HandyC.AndrewsH.SguignaT.SassoA.PayneS. (2014).
The psychological functions of avatars and alt(s): A qualitative study. Computers in Human Behavior,
32, 1–8.
13.
GottschalkS. (2010).
The presentation of avatars in second life: Self and interaction in social virtual spaces. Symbolic Interaction,
33(4), 501–525.
14.
HeeterC. (1992).
Being there: The subjective experience of presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments,
1(2), 262–271.
15.
HerringtonJ.OliverR.ReevesT. C. (2003).
Patterns of engagement in authentic online learning environments. Australian Journal of Educational Technology,
19(1), 59–71.
16.
HortonD.WohlR. R. (1956).
Mass communication and parasocial interaction: Observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry,
19(3), 215–229.
17.
JinS.-A A. (2009).
Avatars mirroring the actual self versus projecting the ideal self: The effects of Self-Priming on interactivity and immersions in an exergame, wii fit. Cyberpsychology & Behavior: The Impact of the Internet, Multimedia and Virtual Reality on Behavior and Society,
12(6), 761–765.
18.
JinS.-A A. (2010).
Parasocial interaction with an avatar in second life: A typology of the self and an empirical test of the mediating role of social presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments,
19(4), 331–340.
19.
JinS.-A. A.ParkN. (2009).
Parasocial interaction with my avatar: Effects of interdependent self-construal in an avatar-based console game. Cyberpsychology & Behavior,
12(6), 723–727.
20.
LeeK. M. (2004).
Presence, explicated. Communication Theory,
14(1), 27–50.
21.
LombardM.DittonT. (2006).
At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,
3(2).
22.
MantovaniG.RivaG. (1999). “
Real” presence: How different ontologies generate different criteria for presence, telepresence, and virtual presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments,
8(5), 540–550.
23.
MarshallP. D. (2010).
The specular economy. Society,
47(6), 498–502.
24.
MarshallP. D. (2013).
Personifying agency: The public-persona-place-issue continuum. Celebrity Studies,
4(3), 369–371.
25.
MarshallP. D.BarbourK. (2015).
Making intellectual room for persona studies: A new consciousness and a shifted perspective. Persona Studies,
1(1), 1–12.
26.
MarshallP. D.MooreC.BarbourK. (2015).
Persona as method: Exploring celebrity and the public self through persona studies. Celebrity Studies,
6(3), 288–305.
27.
MessingerP. R.GeX.StrouliaE.LyonsK.SmirnovK.BoneM. (2008).
On the relationship between my avatar and myself. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research,
1(2), 1–17.
28.
MiklasS.ArnoldS. J. (1999). ‘
The extraordinary self’: Gothic culture and the construction of the self. Journal of Marketing Management,
15(6), 563–576.
29.
MollenA.WilsonH. (2010).
Engagement, telepresence and interactivity in online consumer experience: Reconciling scholastic and managerial perspectives. Journal of Business Research,
63(9–10), 919–925.
30.
MooreC.BarbourK.LeeK. (2017).
Five dimensions of online persona. Persona Studies,
3(1), 1–11.
31.
MorieJ. F.VerhulsdonckG. (2008). Body/persona/action! Emerging non-anthropomorphic communication and interaction in virtual worlds [Paper presentation]. 2008 International Conference on Advances in Computer Education Technology, Yokohama, Japan.
32.
NagyP.KolesB. (2014). “
My avatar and her beloved possessions”: Characteristics of attachment to virtual objects. Psychology & Marketing,
31(12), 1122–1135.
33.
PlunkettD. (2011).
On place attachments in virtual worlds. World Leisure Journal,
53(3), 168–178.
34.
ProcterL. (2017).
Ways of (virtual) seeing: Applying a Bergerian lens in a multi-user virtual environment (MUVE). M/C Journal,
20(4).
35.
SchultzeU. (2011). The Avatar as sociomaterial entanglement: A performative perspective on identity, agency and world-making in virtual worlds [Paper presentation]. Thirty Second International Conference on Information Systems, Shanghai, China.
36.
TurkleS. (1984). The second self: Computers and the human spirit.
MIT Press.
37.
TurkleS. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other.
Basic Books.
38.
VeerapenM. (2010).
Leading a symbembodied life: A phenomenological investigation of second life. The International Journal of the Humanities: Annual Review,
8(5), 105–114.
39.
WebbS. (2001).
Avatarculture: Narrative, power and identity in virtual world environments. Information, Communication & Society,
4(4), 560–594.
40.
YeeN. (2007). The Proteus effect: Behavioral modification via transformations of digital self-representation [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Stanford University.
41.
YeeN.BailensonJ. N.DucheneautN. (2009).
The proteus effect: Implications of transformed digital self-representation on online and offline behavior. Communication Research,
36(2), 285–312.
42.
ZhaoS. (2003).
Toward a taxonomy of copresence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments,
12(5), 445–455.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
