Skip to main content
Log in

Online communities as virtual cognitive niches

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper we aim at discussing cognitive and epistemic features of online communities, by the use of cognitive niche constructions theories, presenting them as virtual cognitive niches. Virtual cognitive niches can be considered as digitally-encoded collaborative distributions of diverse types of information into an environment performed by agents to aid thinking and reasoning about some target domain. Discussing this definition, we will also consider how online communities, as networks displaying a social bias, can both foster civic awareness and promote problematic group-led behaviors in the virtually aggregated crowds. To support this affirmation, we will take into account the use of online communication networks during crises and we will argue that it can lead to ethically dubious consequences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Along this paper, our use of the word virtual, for instance in “virtual reality” or “virtual cognitive niche” includes, but is not limited to, those understandings stressing the 3D, highly graphical and immersive understanding of the word. Rather, it can be understood as a more effective synonym of the prefix cyber. It is a concept that opposes the naïvely real, material world we live in with our flesh-and-blood bodies.

  2. A brief terminological clarification should be introduced at this time. We are going to use the term “online communities” in order to employ a general definition that embraces different types of Internet-based frameworks, as social networking websites, newsgroups, forums, blogs, and miniblogs. We use this term to define a target broad enough to support different references as social media, digital frameworks, and social networks, without being general enough to hold the equivalence with traditional media, as newspapers and television programs.

  3. Cf. (Bertolotti and Magnani 2016) for a full analysis of the interaction between different perspectives regarding the definition of cognitive niches and cognitive niche construction. Pocheville (2015) offers an interesting history of the concept of niche in biology: the changes of the concept over time influenced the different notions of cognitive niche, especially the debate between the constructivist and the non constructivist scholars.

  4. Whether cognitive niches are a human prerogative is a debated topic. Clark (2003) himself, in his definition, refers to “animals” but his examples concern only human beings. Bertolotti and Magnani (2016) argue for the possibility of overlap between low-level cognitive niches and advanced ecological ones. What is beyond argument, though, is the fact that human beings master cognitive niche construction (Magnani 2009).

  5. Bertolotti and Magnani (2016) reduce the shift from ecological niche construction to its cognitive counterpart to the natural shift from biologically connoted enablementLongo et al. (2012) to cognitive affordance.

  6. For instance, if the user has been honest in declaring her birthdate, she will be prone to think that also other users have been honest with the same respect (Acquisti and Gross 2006).

  7. This shift of behavior in the virtual domain is also confirmed by the already mentioned example of ad-hoc online communities, as websites of support of mental health patients, where the sites become “identity laboratory” where marginalized people can find different meanings for their diagnosed condition (Giles and Newbold 2011; Wallace 1999) and even causing forms of “cyberchondria” (White and Horvitz 2008).

  8. Bertolotti (2011) and Bertolotti and Magnani (2013a) argued that a characteristic trait of social networking websites is the co-opting of evolved heuristics underdetermining social cognition. For instance, these websites may delude the user into believing that one’s reputation can be deterministically affected by one’s virtual appearance through what he or she posts online. Infamous cyberbullying accidents make clear how such a belief can stumble upon major shortcomings and self-defeating behaviors.

  9. That is one of the most important assets describing cognitive economy, that is, the need to reach a sort of trade-off between the accuracy of a decision and the limited time one is bounded to (Gigerenzer and Todd 1999).

  10. This is one of the main issues in contemporary social epistemology, namely how to assess valuable and trustworthy testimony (Gelfert 2014; Coady 2012).

  11. In a forthcoming article we intend to discuss whether the implication of the two domains in online communities, the docility-based relation with truth and the tendency to fall into ecological fallacies, can lead to problematic phenomenon of misunderstanding real-world events and data in the context of online network.

  12. https://www.Facebook.com/about/safetycheck/.

  13. Rizza and her colleagues Rizza et al. 2014 provide a thorough analysis of the phenomenon.

References

  • Acquisti, A., & Gross, R. (2006). Imagined communities: awareness, information sharing and privacy on Facebook. Privacy Enhancing Technologies, 4258, 36–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agichtein, E., Castillo, C., Donato, D., Gionis, A., & Mishne, G. (2008). Finding high-quality content in social media. In WSDM’08 (pp. 183–193).

  • Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism (Revised ed.). New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C. (2006). The long tail: Why the future of business is selling less of more. New York: Hyperion.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, Z., & Frederickson, J. (2015). Explanations and implications of the fundamental attribution error: A review and proposal. Journal of Integrated Social Sciences, 5(1), 44–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertolotti, T. (2011). Facebook has it: the irresistible violence of social cognition in the age of social networking. International Journal of Technoethics (IJT), 2(4), 71–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertolotti, T. (2015). Patterns of rationality recurring inferences in science, social cognition and religious thinking. Switzerland: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertolotti, T., & Magnani, L. (2013a). A philosophical and evolutionary approach to cyber-bullying: Social networks and the disruption of sub-moralities. Ethics and Information Technology, 15(4), 285–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertolotti, T., & Magnani, L. (2013b). The role of cognitive niches in mediating knowledge, entropy and violence. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 954–959).

  • Bertolotti, T., & Magnani, L. (2014). An epistemological analysis of gossip and gossip-based knowledge. Synthese, 191, 4037–4067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertolotti, T., & Magnani, L. (2016). Theoretical considerations on cognitive niche construction. Synthese, 1–23. doi:10.1007/s11229-016-1165-2. (first Online).

  • Bootsma, R. J., Bakker, F. C., van Snippenberg, F. J., & Tdlohreg, C. W. (1992). The effects of anxiety on perceiving the reachability of passing objects. Ecological Psychology, 4, 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruns, A. (2012). Ad hoc innovation by users of social networks : the case of Twitter. In for Social Innovation SIC (Ed.) ZSI Discussion Paper (pp. 1–13). Vienna, Austria.

  • Bruns, A., & Highfield, T. (2012). Blogs, Twitter, and breaking news: The produsage of citizen journalism. In R. A. Lind (Ed.), Produsing theory in a digital world: The intersection of audiences and production in contemporary theory (pp. 15–32). New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. (2003). Natural-born cyborg. Minds, technologies, and the feature of human intelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. (2005). World, niche and super-niche: How language makes minds matter more. Theoria, 54, 255–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. J. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coady, D. (2012). What to believe now: Applying epistemology to contemporary issues. New York: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampel, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Socialcapital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 579–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eslami, M., Rickman, A., Vaccaro, K., Aleyasen, A., Vuong, A., Karahalios, K., et al. (2015). “I always assumed that I wasn’t really that close to [her]”: Reasoning about invisible algorithms in news feeds. In B. Begole & J. Kim (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp 153–162). Seoul, Republic of Korea: ACM Press.

  • Gabbay, D. M., & Woods, J. (2005). The reach of abduction: Insight and trial, a practical logic of cognitive systems (Vol. 1). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelfert, A. (2014). A critical introduction to testimony. London: Bloomsbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J. (1950). The perception of the visual world. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In R. E. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving acting and knowing. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P., & The ABC Research Group (1999). Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Giles, D. C., & Newbold, J. (2011). Self- and other-diagnosis in user-led mental health online communities. Qualitative Health Research, 21(3), 419–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenhow, C., Gibbins, T., & Menzer, M. (2015). Re-thinking scientific literacy out-of-school: Arguing science issues in a niche Facebook application. Computers in Human Behavior, 51(2), 593–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hermida, A., Fletcher, F., Korell, D., & Logan, D. (2012). Share, like, recommend. Journalism Studies, 13(5–6), 815–824.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K. F. (2011). Students’ and teachers’ use of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 662–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keen, A. (2007). The Cult of Amateur. How today’s internet is killing our culture and assaulting our economy. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longo, G., Montévil, M., & Kauffman, S. (2012). No entailing laws, but enablement in the evolution of the biosphere. In GECCO Companion ’12 Proceedings of the fourteenth international conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation conference companion (pp. 1379–1392). New York, NY: ACM.

  • Magnani, L. (2009). Abductive cognition. The epistemological and eco-cognitive dimensions of hypothetical reasoning. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, R. (2006). Learning technologies for adult continuing education. Studies in Continuing Education, 28, 121–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mickes, L., Darby, R. S., Hwe, V., Bajic, D., Warker, J. A., Harris, C. R., et al. (2013). Major memory for microblogs. Memory & cognition, 41, 481–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, A., Rosenstiel, T. (2012). The state of the news media: An annual report on American journalism. The Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. http://stateofthemedia.org/2012/.

  • Nagy, P., & Neff, G. (2015). Imagined affordance: Reconstructing a keyword for communication theory. Social Media + Society, 1(2), 1–9.

  • Nairne, J. S., & Pandeirada, J. N. S. (2010). Adaptive memory: Nature’s criterion and the functionalist agenda. The American Journal of Psychology, 123, 381–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Bannon, B. W., Beard, J. L., & Britt, V. G. (2013). Using a Facebook group as aneducational tool: Effects on studentachievement. Computers in the Schools, 30(3), 229–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odling-Smee, F. J., Laland, K. N., & Feldman, M. W. (2003). Niche construction. The neglected process in evolution. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oeldorf-Hirscha, A., & Sundar, S. S. (2015). Posting, commenting, and tagging: Effects of sharing news storieson Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 240–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. UK: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinker, S. (2003). Language as an adaptation to the cognitive niche. In: M.H. Christiansen & S. Kirby (Eds.) Language evolution (pp. 16–37). Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://www.isrl.uiuc.edu/amag/langev/paper/pinker03LanguageAs.html.

  • Pinker, S. (2010). The cognitive niche: Coevolution of intelligence, sociality, and language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 17(Suppl. 2), 8993–8999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pocheville, A. (2015). The ecological niche: History and recent controversies. In T. Heams, P. Huneman, G. Lecointre, & M. Silberstein (Eds.), Handbook of evolutionary thinking in the sciences. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purcell, K., Rainie, L., Mitchell, A., Rosenstiel, T., & Olmstead, K. (2012). Understanding the participatory news consumer. Retrieved Pew Internet & American Life Project. http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Online-News/Summary-of-Findings.aspx.

  • Ractham, P., & Firpo, D. (2011). Using social networking technology to enhance learning in higher education: A case study using Facebook. In Proceedings of the 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1–10).

  • Rizza, C., Pereira, A. G., & Curvelo, P. (2014). “Do-it-yourself justice”: Considerations of social media use in a crisis situation: The case of the 2011 Vancouver riots. International Journal of Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, 6(4), 42–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1993). Altruism and Economics. The American Economic Review, 83(2), 156–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skerrett, A. (2010). Lolita, Facebook, and the third space of literacy teacher education. Educational Studies: A Journal of the American Educational Studies Association, 46(1), 67–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sundar, S. S. (2008). Self as source: Agency and customization in interactive media. In E. A. Konijn, S. Utz, M. Tanis, & S. B. Barnes (Eds.), Mediated interpersonal communication (pp. 58–74). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tooby, J., & DeVore, I. (1987). The reconstruction of hominid behavioral evolution through strategic modeling. In W. G. Kinzey (Ed.), Primate models of hominid behavior. Albany: Suny Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, P. (1999). The psychology of the Internet. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • White, R.W., & Horvitz, E. (2008). Cyberchondria: Studies of the escalation of medical concerns in web search. http://research.microsoft.com/pub/tr/TR2008-178.pdf.

  • Wittaker, A. L., Howarth, G. S., & Lymn, K. A. (2014). Evaluation of Facebook to create an online learning community in an undergraduate animal science class. Educational Media International, 51(2), 135–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woods, J. (2005). Epistemic bubbles. In S. Artemov, H. Barringer, A. Garcez, L. Lamb, & J. Woods (Eds.), We will show them: Essay in honour of Dov Gabbay (Vol. II). London: College Pubblications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woods, J. (2007). The concept of fallacy is empty: A resource-bound approach to error. In L. Magnani & L. Ping (Eds.), Reasoning in Science. Amsterdam: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Matteo Colombo, Thomas Boyer-Kassem and James Grayot, for constructive criticisms and valuable comments on the earlier draft, and to audiences at Tilburg Research Center for Logic, Ethics, and Philosophy of Science for further feedbacks. We also want to express our gratitude towards the two anonymous referees, for their crucial remarks and knowledgeable suggestions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Selene Arfini.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Arfini, S., Bertolotti, T. & Magnani, L. Online communities as virtual cognitive niches. Synthese 196, 377–397 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1482-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1482-0

Keywords

Navigation