, Volume 23, Issue 2, pp 297–307 | Cite as

How anonymous are you online? Examining online social behaviors from a cross-cultural perspective

  • Hiroaki Morio
  • Christopher Buchholz
Open Forum


Communication on the Internet is often described as “anonymous”, yet the usage of the term is often confusing, even in academia. Three levels of anonymity, visual anonymity, dissociation of real and online identities, and lack of identifiability, are thought to have different effects on various components of interpersonal motivation. Specifically, we propose that cross-cultural differences in interpersonal motivation (autonomy vs. affiliation) are illustrated by choices individuals make when deciding whether or not to remain anonymous while communicating online. Autonomy is often valued in Western societies, whereas Eastern societies tend to emphasize affiliation, suggesting that individuals in Western societies will gravitate toward online communities that allow lower levels of anonymity, while individuals in Eastern societies will be more likely to seek out online communities that promote higher levels of anonymity. The research presented in this article supports this notion, suggesting that we need to consider cultural differences when designing online communication systems and other communications technologies.


Western Culture Online Community Autonomy Motivation Social Motivation Chat Room 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Asch SE (1951) Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments. In: Guetzknow H (Ed) Groups, leadership, and men. Carnegie Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  2. Azechi S (2005) Information humidity model: explanation of dual modes of community for social intelligence design. AI Soc 19:110–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Culnan MJ, Markus ML (1987) Information technologies. In: Jablin FM, Putnam LL, Roberts KH, Porter LW (Eds) Handbook of organizational communication: an interdisciplinary perspective. Sage, Newbury Park, pp 420–443Google Scholar
  4. Douglas K, McGarty C (2001) Identifiability and self-presentation: computer-mediated communication and intergroup interaction. Br J Soc Psychol 40:399–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fujihara N (2001) How to evaluate social intelligence design. In: Terano T, Nishida T, Namatame A, Tsumoto S, Ohsawa Y, Washio T (eds) New frontiers in artificial intelligence––Joint JSAI 2001 workshop post-proceedings, lecture notes in artificial intelligence 2253. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  6. Hofstede G (1980) Culture’s consequences. Sage, Beverly HillsGoogle Scholar
  7. Joinson AN (2003) Understanding the psychology of internet behavior: virtual worlds, real lives. Palgrave, BasingstokeGoogle Scholar
  8. Kiesler S, Siegel J, McGuire T (1984) Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. Am Psychol 39:1123–1134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lea M, Spears R, de Groot D (2001) Knowing me, knowing you: anonymity effects on social identity processes within groups. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 27:526–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Markus H, Kitayama S (1991) Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychol Rev 98:224–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Matsumura N, Miura A, Shibanai Y, Ohsawa Y, Nishida T (2005) The dynamism of 2channel. AI Soc 19:84–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Morio H, Latané B, Richardson D (2004) Interpersonal attraction from electronic self-disclosure: cumulative effect of CMC. Proceedings of the 3rd workshop on social intelligence design, 101–109Google Scholar
  13. Nisbett RE (2003) The geography of thought. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Nowak A, Vallacher RR (2002) Emergence of personality: personality stability through interpersonal synchronization. In: Cervone D, Mischell W (Eds) Advances in personality science. Guilford, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Oyserman D, Coon HM, Kemmelmeiser M (2002) Rethinking individualism and collectivism: evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analysis. Psychol Bull 128:3–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Postmes T, Spears R, Lea M (1998) Breaching or building social boundaries? SIDE effects of computer-mediated communication. Communic Res 25:689–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Takano Y, Osaka E (1999) An unsupported common view: comparing Japan and the US on individualism/collectivism. Asian J Soc Psychol 2:311–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Turkle S (1995) Life on the screen: identity in the age of the internet. Simon & Schuster, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sapporo UniversitySapporoJapan
  2. 2.Roanoke UniversitySalemUSA

Personalised recommendations