The Internet has provided a new context for the exploration of the concept of identity. Different identities were expressed on different online settings, which indicates the feature of ‘situational selves’ of online identities. By comparing the differences among WeChat identity, Weibo identity and offline identity, more examples were introduced not only to explain ‘situational selves’, but also the ‘rationality’ in choosing among different online identities.
BeazleyH.EnnewJ. (2006). Participatory methods and approaches: Tackling the two tyrannies. In DesaiV.PotterR. B. (Eds.), Doing development research (pp. 189–199). Sage Publications.
2.
BuberM. (1958). The I-thou theme, contemporary psychotherapy, and psychodrama. Pastoral Psychology, 9(5), 57–58.
3.
BullinghamL.VasconcelosA. C. (2013). ‘The presentation of self in the online world’: Goffman and the study of online identities. Journal of Information Science, 39(1), 101–112.
4.
ChrisA. (2006). The long tail: Why the future of business is selling less of more. Hyperion.
GoffmanE. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Penguin.
7.
HardeyM. (2002). Life beyond the screen: Embodiment and identity through the internet. The Sociological Review, 50(4), 570–585.
8.
HatchJ. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. Suny Press.
9.
HolsteinJ. A.GubriumJ. F. (2004). The active interview: Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice. Sage.
10.
JohanssonC. (2007). Goffman’s sociology: An inspiring resource for developing public relations theory. Public Relations Review, 33(3), 275–280.
11.
JosselsonR. (1993). Imagining the real: Empathy, narrative, and the dialogical self. In JosselsonR.LieblichA. (Eds.), Interpreting experience: The narrative study of lives (Vol. 3, pp. 27–44). Sage.
12.
KirkpatrickD. (2010). The facebook effect: The inside story of the company that is connecting the world. Simon and Schuster.
13.
KrautR.KieslerS.BonevaB.CummingsJ.HelgesonV.CrawfordA. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 49–74.
14.
LiQ. G. (2003). On the dramatic feature of net communication behavior. Journal of Henan Normal University (Philosopy and Social Sciences), 30(4), 103–105.
15.
LiT. X.ZhangQ. Q.SunS. R.SunG.LongR. (2015). The 'Ant tribe''s Self-representation through the Social Network and New Media. The Journal of the Western Radio and Television, 1, 9–11.
16.
LivingstoneS. (2008). Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: Teenagers’ use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression. New Media & Society, 10(3), 393–411.
17.
ManningP. K. (1993). Drama = life?Symbolic Interaction, 16(1), 85–89.
18.
MaxwellJ. A. (1992). Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harvard Educational Review, 62(3), 279–301.
19.
MaxwellJ. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach: An interactive approach. Sage.
20.
MillerH. (1995). The presentation of self in electronic life: Goffman on the Internet [Paper presentation]. Embodied Knowledge and Virtual Space Conference, Goldsmith's College, University of London, June, URL (consulted October 2001). http://www.ntu.ac.uk/soc/psych/miller/goffman.html
21.
QinY.LoweJ. (2019). Is your online identity different from your offline identity? – A study on the college students’ online identities in China. Culture & Psychology. doi:10.1177/1354067X19851023
22.
RubinH. J. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data/Herbert J. Rubin, Irene S. Rubin (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
23.
SeidmanI. (2013). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. Teachers College Press.
24.
SubrahmanyamK.GarciaE.HarsonoL. S.LiJ. S.LipanaL. (2009). In their words: Connecting on‐line weblogs to developmental processes. The British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 27(Pt 1), 219–245.
25.
SubrahmanyamK.ŠmahelD. (2011). Digital youth: The role of media in development. Springer.
TolmanD. L.Brydon-MillerM. (2001). From subjects to subjectivities: A handbook of interpretive and participatory methods. New York University Press.
28.
Van DijckJ. (2013). You have one identity: Performing the self on facebook and LinkedIn. Media, Culture and Society, 35(2), 199–215.
29.
Van DijkJ. (2012). The network society: Social aspects of new media (3rd ed.). Sage.
30.
WangJ. L. (2009). A tentative analysis on self-presentation of individual blog. Press Circles, 25(2), 37–39.
31.
WangT. T. (2011). The self-presentation in social network. Theory Research, 18(17), 49–50.
32.
XuL. L. (2015). An exploration of virtual self-disassimilation in micro era of network. Journal of Shanxi Normal University (Social Sciences), S2(42), 42–46.
33.
YurchisinJ.WatchravesringkanK.McCabeD. B. (2005). An exploration of identity re-creation in the context of internet dating. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 33(8), 735–750.
34.
ZengJ. P. (2002). Virtuality and reality: The theoretical analysis on 'internet dating’. China Youth Study, 14(6), 30–36.
35.
ZhaoS.GrasmuckS.MartinJ. (2008). Identity construction on facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1816–1836.
36.
ZhouM.LiG. P. (2010). The drama theory in interpersonal interaction–an interpretation of 'the self-presentation of daily life. Economic Research Guide, 6(12), 210–211.
