Skip to main content
Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1024//1421-0185.62.2.91

In social psychology, two forms of attachment to groups are distinguished: interpersonal attraction and social identification. A web experiment was conducted to examine whether these two forms of attachment can also be differentiated in virtual communities, more precisely, MUDs (multi-user-dungeons). Both forms of attachment occurred. As expected, the concepts were functionally independent from each other. Whereas interpersonal attraction became stronger with increased duration of group membership and was fostered by physical life contacts, social identification was independent from these factors. Instead, social identification was related to more cognitive indicators of self-categorization. In contrast to interpersonal attraction, social identification was influenced by situational context and predicted group behavior such as ingroup bias.

References

  • Baym, N. K. (1995). The emergence of community in computer-mediated communication. In S. G. Jones (Ed.), CyberSociety: Computer-mediated communication and community (pp. 138-163). Thousand Oaks: Sage. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Branscombe, N. R. , Ellemers, N. , Spears, R. , Doosje, B. (1999). The context and content of social identity threat. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & Doosje B (Eds.), Social identity: context, commitment, content (pp. 35-58). Blackwell: Oxford. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Capozza, D. , Voci, A. , Licciardello, O. (2000). Individualism, collectivism and social identity theory. In D. Capozza, & R. Brown (Eds.), Social identity processes(pp. 62-80). Sage: London. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Fernback, J. , Thompson, B. (1995). Virtual communities: Abort, retry, failure? Computer-mediated communication and the American collectivity: The dimensions of community within cyberspace. Retrieved March 24, 1997, from www.well.com/user/hlr/texts/Vccivil.html. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Gaertner, L. , Insko, C.A. (2000). Intergroup discrimination in the minimal group paradigm. Categorization, reciprocation, or fear? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 77– 94. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Gaertner, L. , Schopler, J. (1998). Perceived ingroup entitativity and intergroup bias: An interconnection of self and others. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 963– 980. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Gaertner, S. L. , Mann, J. , Murrell, A. , Dovidio, J. F. (1989). Reducing intergroup bias: The benefits of recategorization. . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 239– 249. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hinkle, S. , Brown, R. (1990). Intergroup comparisons and social identity: Some links and lacunae. In D. Abrams, & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Social Identity Theory: Constructive and critical advances(pp. 48-70). London: Harvest-Wheatsheaf. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hogg, M. A. (1992). The social psychology of group cohesiveness: From attraction to social identity. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hogg, M. A. (1993). Group cohesiveness: A critical review and some new directions. European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 85– 111. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hogg, M. A. , Turner, J. C. (1985). Interpersonal attraction, social identification and psychological group formation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 15, 51– 66. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Horrigan, J. B. , Rainie, L. , Fox, S. (2001). Online communities: Networks that nurture long-distance relationships and local ties. Retrieved November, 3, 2001 from www.pewinternet.org. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Kiesler, S. , Siegel, J. , McGuire, T. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 1123– 1134. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • King, S. (1994). Analysis of electronic support groups for recovering addicts?. Interpersonal Computing and Technology, 2, 47– 56. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Kraut, R. , Lundmark, V. , Patterson, M. , Kiesler, S. , Mukopadhyay, T. , Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox.. A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53, 1017– 1031. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Lea, M. , Spears, R. (1995). Love at first byte? Building personal relationships over computer networks. In J. T. Wood, & S. Duck (Eds.), Under-studied relationships: Off the beaten track(pp. 197-233). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Linville, P. W. , Fischer, G. W. , Salovey, P. (1989). Perceived distributions of the characteristics of in-group and out-group members: Empirical evidence and a computer simulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 165– 188. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • McKenna, K. Y. A. , Bargh, J.A. (1998). Coming out in the age of the Internet: Identity “demarginalization” through virtual group participation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 681– 694. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Melcher, W. (1996). Der Einfluss von Gruppendarstellung auf das Phänomen der Ingroupfavorisierung: Experimentelle Untersuchungen am Beispiel kategorialer Aggressionsurteile. [The impact of the group representation on ingroup favorization: Experimental analyses illustrated by categorial aggression judgements]. Münster: Lit Verlag. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Musch, J. , Reips, U.-D. (2000). The brief history of web-experimenting: A survey. In M. H. Birnbaum (Ed.), Psychological experiments on the Internet (pp. 61-88). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Parks, M. R. , Floyd, K. (1996). Making friends in cyberspace. . Journal of Communication, 46, 80– 97. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Parks, M. R. , Roberts, L. D. (1998). “Making MOOsic”: The development of personal relationships on-line and a comparison to their off-line counterparts. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 517– 537. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Postmes, T. , Spears, R. (2000). Refining the cognitive redefinition of the group: Deindividuation effects in common bond vs. common identity groups. In T. Postmes, R. Spears, M. Lea, & S. Reicher (Eds.), SIDE effects centre stage: Recent developments in studies of de-individuation in groups(pp. 62-78). Amsterdam: KNAW. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Prentice, D. A. , Miller, D. T. , Lightdale, J. R. (1994). Asymmetries in attachments to groups and to their members: Distinguishing between common-identity and common-bond groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 484– 493. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rabbie, J. M. , Horwitz, M. (1988). Categories versus groups as explanatory concepts in intergroup relations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 17, 117– 123. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rabbie, J. M. , Schot, J. C. , Visser, L. (1989). Social identity theory: A conceptual and empirical critique from the perspective of a Behavioral Interaction Model. European Journal of Social Psychology, 19, 171 202. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Reicher, S. D. , Spears, R. , Postmes, T. (1995). A social identity model of deindividuation phenomena. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European Review of Social Psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 161-197). Chichester: Wiley. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Reid, E. (1991). Electropolis - Communication and community on Internet Relay Chat. Retrieved January 7, 2000, from www.aluluei.com/. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Rutter, D. R. (1984). Looking and seeing. The role of visual communication in social interaction.. Chichester: Wiley. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Sassenberg, K. (2002). Common bond and common identity groups on the Internet: Attachment and normative behavior in on-topic and off-topic chats. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice, 6, 27– 37. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Sassenberg, K. , Postmes, T. (2002). Cognitive and strategic processes in small groups: Effects of anonymity of the self and anonymity of the group on social influence. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 463– 480. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Short, J. , Williams, E. , Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. Chichester: Wiley. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Simon, B. , Massau, C. (1991). Soziale Identifikation, Eigengruppen-Favorisierung und Selbst-Stereotypisierung: Der Fall Oskar Lafontaine und die Saarländer. [Social identification, ingroup favoritism, and self-stereotyping: the case of Oskar Lafontaine and the people of the Saarland] Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 22, 193– 207. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Stegbauer, C. , Rausch, A. (1999). Die Konstitution sozialer Netzwerke durch Threads. [The constitution of social networks by threads]. In B. Batinic, A. Werner, L. Gräf, & W. Bandilla (Eds.), Online Research (pp. 201-212). Göttingen: Hogrefe. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Tajfel, H. (1978). Differentiation between social groups. London: Academic Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Tajfel, H. , Billig, M. , Bundy, R. P. , Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 149– 178. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Tajfel, H. , Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin, & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publ. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Turner, J. C. (1999). Some current issues in research on social identity and self-categorization theories. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social Identity. Context, commitment, content(pp. 6-34). Blackwell: Oxford. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Turner, J. C. , Hogg, M. A. , Oakes, P. J. , Reicher, S. D. , Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Utz, S. (1999). Soziale Identifikation mit virtuellen Gemeinschaften - Bedingungen und Konsequenzen. [Social identification with virtual communities - causes and consequences]. Lengerich: Pabst. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Utz, S. (2000). Social Information Processing in MUDs: The development of friendships in virtual worlds. Journal of Online Behavior, 1, 1 Retrieved November 15, 2000 from www.behavior.net/JOB/v1n1/utz.html. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Utz, S. (2001). Der Aufbau von interpersonalen Beziehungen in MUDs: Die Rolle von Motiven und Kommunikationsstrategien. [The development of interpersonal relationships in MUDs: The role of motives and communication strategies] Gruppendynamik und Organisationsberatung, 32, 145– 160. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interaction: A Relational Perspective. Communication Research, 19, 52– 90. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Walther, J. B. (1995). Relational aspects of computer-mediated communication: Experimental observations over time. Organizational Science, 6, 186– 203. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Walther, J. B. (1997). Group and interpersonal effects in international computer-mediated collaboration. Human Communication Research, 23, 342– 369. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar