Crossing the Streams: Discussing Context Collapse

I recently read two really great blog posts that dissected and analyzed Urie Bronfenbrenner's theory of ecological development in the context of social media use. Paul Gordon Brown and Paul Eaton are two fabulous writers/researchers doing work in the area of social media and student development. Each wrote about Bronfenbrenner's theory, but with slightly different twists.

Reading the two posts pushed me to think more about my own area of research interest related to how social media use influences male gender identity development. Of particular interest after reading Brown and Eaton's blog posts was the idea of how multiple systems make up a student's social ecology and how we can observe where those systems interact with (or bounce off of) one another when watching an identity develop on social media. After all, "we present ourselves differently based on who we are talking to and where the conversation takes place" (Marwick & boyd 2010, p. 114). So how does the interaction within and between a student's social systems create both friction AND a better understanding of personal identity development?

A little background: Bronfenbrenner's Bioecological Development Model falls under the person-environment theory branch of the student development tree. Bronfenbrenner studied how the interaction between a person and that person's environment influences student growth. Brown gives a very nice, succinct overview of Bronfenbrenner's work in his post:

"In Bronfenbrenner’s theory, development occurs as a result of the interaction of a person and the environment. This “ecology” consists of four components: process, person, context and time. The person, or college student, is the focus of the development and possesses certain characteristics and personality traits that influence or impact the trajectory of their development. The person develops thorough proximal processes that are the interactions that spur or retard their development. All of this takes place through time and in context. Context is the component of the theory that is of most interest here, and it includes four components:

• Microsystem: Activity and face-to-face interactions in the immediate environment. (roommates, family, sports teams, etc.)
• Mesosystem: Processes that take place between or as a result of microsystem contact and/or overlap. (campus culture, different role obligations, etc.).
• Exosystem: Influence an individual but do not directly include them. (School rules, financial aid policies, the NCAA, the Department of Education, etc.)
• Macrosystem: Overall contextual beliefs that influence the whole system. (American democracy, meritocratic notions, etc.)"

Interactions on social media sites fall within the microsystem category; the transactional interactions on a micro - or more immediate - level. A step back from that is the mesosystem, where microsystems are in contact with one another and create a more complete picture of the greater environment that influences a student. It's at this point where Eaton mentions context collapse in his post, which is one of the central ideas I would like to investigate in my research.

Eaton says of the mesosystem: "Social media users must navigate the interaction between digital environments and physical environments in a complex set of relational processes. boyd (2014) refers to this process as avoiding identity and context collapse." Eaton talks about the relationship between the digital and physical, and Brown talks about adding the layer of the relationship between multiple and varied digital environments. The various opportunities for identities and microsystems to bump into one another and disrupt or impede development is an area ripe for this idea of context collapse.

The plan for my dissertation research is to study how social media acts as a critical influence in male gender identity development.  Specifically how college men use public social media (e.g. Facebook) compared anonymous social media (e.g. Yik Yak) and examining performed gender in those online spaces.  I'm very interested in context collapse and feel as though this could be an interesting part of the qualitative data.

danah boyd used the term "context collapse" to describe how a social media network like Twitter collapses multiple audiences into a single context. That collapsing of contexts makes it difficult for the user to understand the scope of the audience and makes it difficult to negotiate and manage interactions like one would in a face-to-face conversation. Marwick and boyd (2011) wrote that individuals have a sense of audience in every mediated conversation. So whether that audience is imagined or constructed, the individual makes a decision about how to present themselves in a manner that they feel is appropriate to the context of that interaction. Through social media or through other methods of digital technology (Michael Wesch (2009) discussed context collapse via computer webcams in his research) the distribution of an individual's image or message negates an ability to negotiate a conversation like you would in a face-to-face interaction.

There is a vital connection between context collapse and performed masculine identity. The pressure to perform as a man and fit into whatever socially constructed image of masculinity exists in that particular man's context can create internal conflict regarding identity. When that performance is then disbursed digitally and left open for interpretation by others, the collapsing contexts can create a dilemma for college men. "That's not what I meant by that." "You misunderstood..." "I'm really not THAT guy." As an example: a college male may share a post objectifying women because of a masculine role defined by peers, but by doing so may jeopardize an opportunity for a summer internship. So identity confusion for men negotiating masculinity among social systems is compounded by this idea that he doesn't even really know who is seeing what he's posting or how it's being interpreted. This is troublesome and something I look forward to investigating as I move forward with my planned research.

Brown brings up several great questions in his post: Are our students in "multiple worlds" at once? Do each of these worlds contain their own set of interactions, norms and rules? How do students "hold everything together" when they hop from app-to-app, world-to-world, and relationship-to-relationship on their smartphones? My responses: "Yes," "yes" and "I have no idea - it's a struggle, but we can help!"

So what do we do about it? Context collapse is not really entirely preventable in a current college climate where our students exists in multiple social microsystems at once, nor should it be - learning to negotiate relationships and understanding both the scope of and differentiation within your social systems is vital to identity development. But there is an opportunity for education and guidance around context collapse. What are the soft skills that helps one navigate when one identity intersects with another? These might include:

1. Continued development of interpersonal skills
2. Understanding social and professional etiquette (though I understand the difficulties therein because of culture-specific understandings of both)
3. Recognizing politics of relationships and developing political savvy
4. Understanding consequences of social media mis-steps
5. Developing skills to "fail forward" - learning from struggles of balancing social systems in order to negotiate all relationships in positive ways

How do we engage students in the process of recognizing the complex nature of connections and relationships? Bringing in the idea of context collapse and understanding audiences - both imagined and constructed - and openly discussing how our performed identities are perceived and interpreted should be included in conversations.

I can't help but think of this valuable advice Egon Spengler once gave Peter Venkman in Ghostbusters. Spengler told Venkman never to cross the streams from the Proton Packs because of the dire consequences that may ensue. I think about context collapse in this way - we often warn students in very surface ways that posting and saying things online have potentially negative consequences and to be mindful of the crossover (i.e. "Don't cross the streams!"). But with the expanding use of social media, the streams are going to cross. And, as we saw in the epic final scene, the streams crossing can be messy but ultimately end up providing an opportunity for something positive (like beating Gozer and destroying the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man, of course!). Crossing the streams may not result in the total protonic reversal of which Spengler warned us, but may actually spur identity development (both digital and non-digital) and push our students toward becoming more conscious of their social systems.

Thoughts? Ideas for how to address collapsing contexts in digital relationships? 

Confirmation Bias via Social Media

 "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." - Nobel Prize-winning physicist Max Planck

That statement is a pretty cynical view of the ability to argue and reason via dialogue, but it may well sum up where we are in the burgeoning golden age of social media. As we enter the point of global social media saturation, the use of the medium informs - and skews - our ability to share multiple perspectives. Ironic, isn't it? That the medium that seemingly shrinks the distance between people and ideas is often actually limiting us in our rational dialogue? Of course at its best social media provide terrific formats for conversation, idea sharing and knowledge acquisition. But unmediated, open venues are spaces where bullheaded persuasion is the key to determining what information has value. 

The truth now, according to Cordelia Fine, is "established less by the noble use of reason than by the stubborn exertion of will." This stubborn exertion of will is our commitment to our own ideas - to sticking to our beliefs and mindsets.

According to Stanovich, West and Toplak (2013), confirmation bias (or "myside bias") occurs "when people evaluate evidence, generate evidence, and test hypotheses in a manner biased toward their own prior opinions and attitudes." Confirmation bias is when we agree with something because it supports or aligns with what we already believe. It can be dangerous and limiting to our ability to have rational conversations and it's being amplified by social media.

You've likely heard Twitter being referred to as an "echo chamber."  An idea is shared and it's regurgitated over and over and suddenly it's just what 1,000 others have said and it loses it's impact. I first heard this term from T.J. Logan and have carried it with me when thinking about how I share and interact on social media. The echo chamber encourages and promotes confirmation bias - it keeps us in the same circles of thought and locks us into patterns of acting.

It's the easy thing to do, though. We fall in line with what others are saying. We take the popular perspective and tell ourselves we agree with it and then refuse to bring in other perspectives. (And even when we say we're open to other perspectives, our actions and words don't always support that. It's true. Don't deny it... we all do it).

Confirmation bias is the exact opposite of what we tell our students every day. We help our students move away from dualistic thinking from the moment they walk in the door, yet we often end up seeing ideas as "right" and "wrong" online. As a result, our actions in promoting our "right" and denouncing the "wrong" are not helpful models of rational thought and positive dialogue.

Many of us put off anything that might challenge us or make us uncomfortable - anything that falls outside our comfort zone. Behavioral psychologist B.F. Skinner called this cognitive dissonance - when something we hold true or right is challenged and it pushes us to question our own beliefs... to question if what we thought was "right" is actually right anymore. But allowing outside perspectives to challenge us drives us toward conversations that eliminate duality and promote the very thing we encourage students to do - think globally, think from varied and diverse perspectives, respect the opinions of others. Social media gives us a powerful tool for letting other perspectives influence us if we take off the blinders of confirmation bias and avoid the echo chamber.

We see confirmation bias show through on big, vital, human topics like Ferguson and Eric Garner. But we also see it sneak into trivial, everyday conversations like college football playoff rankings. But letting confirmation bias affect thinking on the small things (like college football) trains us to let it affect how we think about critical moral and ethical issues (like privilege and race).

In his book "Digital Leader," Erik Qualman talks about the role we have in social media to create awareness and engagement. Qualman writes "Remember that influence has surpassed information in terms of importance because information is cheap and easily accessible." Reason, influence and dialogue evidently are not as cheap. So how are you using your digital influence to encourage dialogue? How are you avoiding confirmation bias in your digital engagement to allow others space to share, learn and grow regardless of whether their opinion is different than your own?

Our innate motivation to connect to those who share our point of view is important, but it's finding significance in arguments and opinions in opposition to our own thinking that make us better critical thinkers and better educators, particularly in the digital spaces we occupy. I hope we can all agree on that.

The #MenInSA Series: To Bro or Not to Bro

This entry is also posted on The Student Affairs Collective as part of the #MenInSA series

What does it mean to be a man in Student Affairs? I must preface this post by admitting that I have never really spoken to other men about what it means to be a man in this field. I won't generalize the masculine Student Affairs professional experience or try to assume that what I have experienced provides the lens through which other men see their experience, but I can be honest and say that I haven't given the relationship between my gender and my job much thought. But that's the way it often is with men, right? - we don't think of ourselves as gendered beings.

We have about 35-40 staff members who regularly attend Student Life Division functions at my institution. Of those, only 5 are men. So do I think about gender at work? Sure. When I look around the room in most meetings and see only women, it crosses my mind. But more as an observation and less about the power or influence I may have without even being fully aware of it. After all, I did not create the system that gives me an advantage as a man, but I recognize that I am able to simply follow my privilege through the door each morning - something many of my colleagues can't experience.

When I do think of what it means to be a man in Student Affairs, I reflect on my personality and the stereotyped personality of men in this field. I'm 6-foot-5 and 240 pounds. I'm not a small man. Combine that with being introverted and much more likely to listen than speak and I have earned the tag of "being intimidating." Intimidating is not a phrase we often place on those in Student Affairs.

Colin Stewart wrote a post for the #MenInSA blog this month and he said "Being a man in Student Affairs means constantly challenging stereotypes that men aren't all aggressors, dominant, jokers, jocks, idiots or strong silent types. Men can follow, listen, be intelligent, creative, be sensitive, be affectionate and be good partners." I appreciate Mr. Stewart's message because it highlights an unfortunate perspective many in our field have about the need to have all of those qualities be mutually exclusive. We need jocks, we need jokers and we need strong silent types in this field to relate to our male students and bridge the gap between who many of our students are and the men who serve them. Jocks, jokers, strong silent types and even "bros" are capable of following, listening, being creative and sensitive, etc. Contrary to popular belief, being a bro isn't an affliction; being a bro is a complicated and important part of a man's learned behavior. If we are able to understand how our masculine identity intersects with other aspects of our lives, we have the ability to help our bros evolve.

The man mask is most often used to describe how men put on a façade in order to live out socially-constructed definitions of what it means to be manly. Men - often college men - put on the mask to align actions with what they perceive culture's understanding of masculinity to be. The stereotypical man mask is not the image we have of men in Student Affairs. My experience shows me that many male professionals in Student Affairs are forced to put on the man mask to connect with male students. But I find that the mask I put on is one that allows me to fall into what is assumed of men in Student Affairs - "touchy feely," outwardly sensitive, emotionally expressive. It's not that I don't possess these attributes, it's that I feel as though I need to put on the "Student Affairs man mask" in order to live up to the assumed role I should play as a professional.

In an ironic twist, I often feel disadvantaged by not being a gay man. You laugh, but I have been asked many times over the years if I am gay (and often they point to my earring as some sort of indicator. No joke). When I sheepishly admit to being heterosexual, I hear "I kind of assumed most men in res life were gay." Because there's an unfair assumption that in order to do Student Affairs work well, male professionals must possess qualities that are generally associated with gay men (another unfair assumption). So how do I reconcile society's expectations of me as a man versus what a male Student Affairs professional should be versus who I truly believe myself to be? That's a lot of existential thinking, even for a strong silent type.

We've come to understand that the "guy code" can be detrimental to developing healthy masculine identities and that "bro culture" inhibits the men on our campuses from expressing emotion, demonstrating care and understanding their privilege. But what if my default setting is rooted in the code? What if I feel as though I've evolved to place of comfort in understanding my masculinity and can still feel connected to other men by being a "bro"? And not the hipster kind of ironic "being a bro," but actually connecting with and understanding the role that the "guy code" plays in the journey to manhood.

Do I have privilege in my profession because I'm a man? Absolutely. Seen or unseen, conscious or not, I do. But the distinct advantage I have within my own gender is one of understanding how men in Student Affairs can play multiple roles. Feel like that’s not authentic? I’d argue playing multiple (but connected) roles as a man in this field makes you infinitely more genuine than the man who simply finds one mask he likes. So to all the men in Student Affairs, don't strive to be the anti-bro - understand the vital role that both the man mask and the Student Affairs man mask play in your lives as professionals.

Explaining Res Life Through MS Paint

There are many of us of a certain age who first explored creativity on desktop computers using PC Paintbrush. Generously referred to as "graphics editing software," it was an opportunity for a kid to try something on a computer that he could previously only do on paper. The substitution of technology in place of paper was fun and led to some brilliant artistic creations in elementary school computer labs everywhere.

PC Paintbrush became Microsoft Paint and the average computer user gained access to more and more sophisticated graphics editing software, but there's still a little bit of magic and fun left with MS Paint. I decided to dust off the skills and create a few pictures that sum up life in Residential Life. Turns out it's remarkably therapeutic and an awesome way to procrastinate.

Inspired by #MSPaintMonday, which is primarily used by those who talk about college football on Reddit, I give you the res life and student affairs version of a tremendous time-waster...

 

 

I also thought it might be fun to create a few that sum up professional life in student affairs. I was right - it was fun.

Think you have some fun pictures to create? You know you want to try it. I'd love for you to share them - Tweet them to me (@pottscharlie)!

#SAChat Final Thought: Practice Makes Progress

I'm honored to have another post appear on the Student Affairs Collective. It's about the value of writing professionally and why it's important to write, write again and then write some more.

Check it out HERE.

The Top 5 Res Life Skills You Need to Survive the Zombie Apocalypse

It's that time of the year. Halloween. Ghosts, goblins and ghouls. It's a holiday for those who love being scared and being scary.

So in honor of Halloween, let's talk about The Top 5 Res Life Skills You Need to Survive the Zombie Apocalypse: 

1. Occupancy Management. When the Zombies show up for your brains, it would be wise to retreat to your underground shelter. But who is staying in which bed? Do you have enough pillows and sheets? Need some loft kits so you can bunk up and create more space? Your occupancy management skills will come in handy!

2. Rationing Food. Did you mistakenly advertise a hall program to last from 9-11pm only to run out of food by 9:05pm? It's happened to all of us. But you've been polishing the food rationing skills, making sure that there are enough toppings for all those ice cream sundaes you'll need to serve. With the Zombie Apocalypse, you never know how much time you'll be spending in shelter so you'll need to ration your food as strictly as you do those milk and cookies at a hall council event.

3. Active listening. This one will be very handy. First, Zombies kind of drag softly across the ground and often grunt nearly inaudibly as they approach. All that time living in a residence hall has prepared you to hear even the most cat-like movements outside your apartment door - so you should be ready for Zombie visitors! Your active listening skills will also come in handy if you should enter into dialogue with said approaching Zombies. Seated in an open position, ready to receive the grunts and moans with approving nods will help greatly. Repeating and paraphrasing may help put the Zombies at ease and buy you some time to escape.

4. Mediation. Another place your active listening skills will serve you well is mediation. Perhaps you are face to face with a Zombie - ask them what their main concerns are with your existence. Use "I" statements (i.e. "I need you to stop gnawing at my skull" or "I need you to stop grunting so loudly. It's quiet hours.") and try to work out issues before they get out of hand. A behavioral agreement is recommended - get the offending undead to agree to be upfront, honest and open about how they will behave to move forward in a peaceful manner.

5. Delegation. You can't survive off the apocalypse by yourself. But you've assembled a great team to assist you, so use them! Need someone to board up the windows? Ask an RA! Need someone to take inventory of dried goods? Rely on your colleagues! There will be lots of tasks and lots of opportunities for group decision-making - trust your co-workers and maximize your group's effectiveness in keeping the brain-eaters at bay.

Of course, the downside is that because you are dedicated professionals you have spent much time and energy developing skills and acquiring knowledge to make you smarter. Smarter means a bigger brain, right? Bigger brain means more appetizing target for the Zombies. But focus on the skills listed above and I'm sure you'll be fine...

Good luck to you this Halloween!

(*Note: Nothing in this blog post is scientifically accurate. Pretty sure Zombies don't even exist).

(Or do they?....)