ARTICLE IN PRESS
`
`Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 66 (2008) 801–811
`
`www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhcs
`
`Avatars in social media: Balancing accuracy, playfulness and
`embodied messages
`Asimina Vasaloua, , Adam Joinsona, Tanja Ba¨ nzigerb, Peter Goldiec, Jeremy Pittd
`
`aSchool of Information Management, University of Bath, BA2 7AA, Bath, UK
`bDepartment of Psychology, University of Geneva, 40 Boulevard du Pont-d’Arve, CH-1205, Geneva, Switzerland
`cDepartment of Philosophy, University of Manchester, Dover Street Building, M13 9PL, Manchester, UK
`dElectrical and Electronic Engineering, Imperial College, Exhibition Road, SW7 2AZ, London, UK
`
`Received 9 May 2008; received in revised form 6 August 2008; accepted 11 August 2008
`Communicated by S. Wiedenbeck
`Available online 14 August 2008
`
`Abstract
`
`This paper examines how users negotiate their self-presentation via an avatar used in social media. Twenty participants customised an
`avatar while thinking aloud. An analysis of this verbal data revealed three motivating factors that drive self-presentation: (1) avatars were
`used to accurately reflect their owners’ offline self; participants chose to display stable self-attributes or idealised their avatar by
`concealing or emphasising attributes aligned to imagined social roles, (2) the diversity of customisation options was exploited by some
`participants who broke free from the social rules governing self-presentation offline; others used the avatar’s appearance to emotionally
`provoke and engage the avatar viewer and finally, (3) avatars were used as proxies; participants designed their online self in order to
`convey a message to a significant other.
`r 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
`
`Keywords: Avatars; Social media; Self-presentation; Identity
`
`1. Introduction
`
`Increasingly, social system designers are introducing
`avatars as the new forum for identity construction in online
`environments, a feature users have welcomed with en-
`thusiasm. Following Yahoo’s launch of Yahoo! Avatars, 7
`million users personalised an avatar for display within their
`profiles e.g. Yahoo! 3601, Yahoo! Answers, Yahoo!
`Messenger (Hemp, 2006). Likewise, four million users
`created an avatar after the facility (called ‘weemee’) was
`introduced to the chat system ‘Windows Live Messenger’.1
`This rapid uptake of avatars is not surprising; while avatars
`maintain users’ privacy, they give expressive freedom over
`
` Corresponding author.
`E-mail addresses: a.vasalou@bath.ac.uk (A. Vasalou), a.joinson@
`bath.ac.uk (A. Joinson), Tanja.Banziger@pse.unige.ch (T. Ba¨ nziger),
`peter.goldie@manchester.ac.uk (P. Goldie), j.pitt@imperial.ac.uk
`(J. Pitt).
`1Retrieved from http://www.weeworld.com/about/partner.aspx?partner
`¼ 22 on 31/03/08.
`
`1071-5819/$ - see front matter r 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
`doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2008.08.002
`
`an otherwise static online identity. In an illustrative
`example, V-Chat, a virtual chat-room, allowed users to
`either design their own avatar, which was particularly time
`demanding, or to select from already-made options. In
`general, V-Chat users spurned the latter option, instead
`taking the time to create unique representations so that
`they ‘‘didn’t look like others’’ (Cheng et al., 2002).
`Avatars are malleable objects as users are given the
`ability to choose diverse customisation combinations.
`Motivated by this fluid property of avatars, HCI research-
`ers have examined the social implications of avatars by
`considering how users manage self-presentation through
`this new medium and to what extent an avatar’s
`appearance can shape online communication (e.g. Bers et
`al., 2001; Axelsson, 2002; Taylor, 2002; Nowak and Rauh,
`2005). This prior work has traditionally taken place in
`virtual environments where users’ avatars serve as online
`embodiments
`for navigating three-dimensional
`spaces.
`Though members may forge friendships over time, at the
`onset they communicate with previously unknown others.
`
`APPL-1047
`APPLE INC./Page 1 of 11
`
`

`

`802
`
`A. Vasalou et al. / Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 66 (2008) 801–811
`
`ARTICLE IN PRESS
`
`More recently, avatars have been implanted in social media
`environments. Unlike the strangers one encounters in other
`online environments, users of social media predominantly
`interact with offline contacts such as friends and family:
`bloggers document their daily lives to keep their family and
`friends informed (Nardi et al., 2004); users of the social
`networking site Facebook visit the site to reconnect with
`old friends or to maintain ongoing friendships (Joinson,
`2008). Furthermore, the open text channel available in
`social media provokes self-reflection that is reminiscent
`of diary entries: bloggers document their life events (Nardi
`et al., 2004), use blogging as a form of ‘‘catharsis’’ for
`working out their emotions (Nardi et al., 2004; Huffaker
`and Calvert, 2005), or voice their opinions on controversial
`topics e.g. politics (Nardi et al., 2004). Therefore, in social
`media, one’s offline social and emotional life is merged with
`the online sphere.
`This unity of offline and online has been found to
`facilitate more honest constructions of identity and self-
`presentation, as opposed to the role playing that often
`takes place in virtual environments or MUDs
`(e.g.
`Bruckman, 1993; Turkle, 1995; Taylor, 2002).2 To give
`an example, bloggers frequently report identifying and
`accurate profile information such as their real name or age
`(Herring et al., 2004; Huffaker and Calvert, 2005).
`A similar result has been shown in relation to avatars;
`users tend to reflect their own appearance when personalis-
`ing an avatar for display within their blog (Vasalou et al.,
`2007). This previous work, however, does not reveal the
`strategies that users draw together to shape a self-
`representative avatar. The present research addresses this
`point with a qualitative study that captures the array of
`self-presentation strategies that users apply when con-
`structing an avatar. By elucidating the ‘‘how’’ behind
`self-presentation, we gain a more profound theoretical
`understanding about identity in social media. At the same
`time, by exposing which customisation choices are sig-
`nificant to users, we extrapolate design recommendations
`for avatar customisation tools.
`We begin by discussing how theories on identity and self-
`presentation apply to the unique qualities of the avatar
`medium. Next, we describe the experiment conducted;
`users were requested to construct an avatar for two social
`media scenarios. The qualitative ‘‘think aloud’’ methodol-
`ogy used in this work is also motivated. This is followed by
`an analysis of the results outlining the full spectrum of self-
`presentation strategies participants used during avatar
`creation. This paper ends with a general discussion that
`identifies three motivating factors guiding self-presentation
`in social media: (1) accurate self-presentation (2) playful
`
`2The qualitative differences between social media and virtual environ-
`ments are also understood within Schroeder’s (2002) sociology-inspired
`framework for virtual environments: an online interaction is uniquely
`framed within a context and it is characterised by the social roles users are
`compelled to take. In addition,
`the technological
`features of
`the
`environment can encourage or discourage certain behaviours by influen-
`cing users’ object of focus.
`
`self-presentation and (3) embodied messages. The theore-
`tical implications of these results are extended to the field
`of online communication, while several practical implica-
`tions are considered for the design of avatar customisation
`tools.
`
`2. Background
`
`2.1. Identity and self-presentation
`
`to be actors,
`Goffman (1959) considered humans
`constantly following a social
`script. By using front,
`composed of setting, appearance and manner, an actor
`idealises his/her self-presentation as s/he conceals or
`emphasises aspects that correspond to the values governing
`a particular situation. More specifically, Goffman defined
`front as the, ‘‘expressive equipment of a standard kind
`intentionally or unwittingly employed by the individual
`during his performance’’ (Goffman, 1959, p. 32). The
`setting is the stage which the actor chooses as a backdrop
`for his/her performance. A first date is arranged to take
`place at a restaurant; a work meeting convenes at a
`conference room. The actor’s appearance is comprised by
`stable characteristics such as age, gender and race. Other
`aspects of appearance are malleable such as one’s displayed
`social standing or recreational activities at a given moment
`in time. Manner is the expressive signals one intentionally
`or unintentionally gives off. For instance, a speaker
`presenting at a seminar, as expected, will display a calm
`and confident demeanour. Conversely, despite efforts to
`remain calm, the speaker may give off signals of anxiety.
`Generally, appearance and manner are expected to align.
`For example, during a project pitch, the creative director is
`formally dressed while his/her manner should transmit
`confidence with the team’s proposal even though the client
`may momentarily question his/her judgment.
`Unlike Goffman’s microscopic analysis of self, Higgins
`(1987) approached the same concept from a macroscopic
`view. According to Higgins, there are three self-aspects,
`perceived either from the actor’s point of view or from an
`imagined audience’s perspective. The ideal self is composed
`of qualities which the actor or others wish for him/her to
`possess, while the ought self comprises qualities which the
`actor or others expect him/her to possess due to obligation.
`The actual self is composed of stable qualities the actor or
`others believe s/he possesses.
`Goffman’s and Higgins’ frameworks have been used to
`answer questions
`regarding online identity and self-
`presentation. Aligned to Goffman’s view, Ellison et al.
`(2006) showed that online daters have a tendency to idealise
`their self-presentation by controlling the cues they give off.
`In the wider field of computer-mediated communication,
`Bargh et al. (2002) found that online users, liberated by
`anonymity, generally express more actual self-aspects than
`when they communicate face-to-face. Identity construction
`in this previous work was limited to either text-based or
`pictorial representations. Avatars present two distinctive
`
`APPL-1047
`APPLE INC./Page 2 of 11
`
`

`

`ARTICLE IN PRESS
`
`A. Vasalou et al. / Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 66 (2008) 801–811
`
`803
`
`properties, the opportunity for controlled expressivity and
`the presence of
`(and possibility for) ambiguity. The
`remainder of this section elaborates on how these properties
`may further influence users’ self-presentation.
`
`2.2. Controlled expressivity
`
`In face-to-face communication, the actor executes the
`performance in part by using his/her body as a tool,
`intentionally coordinating appearance and emotion expres-
`sion (Goffman, 1959). Though expression may constitute
`an intentional ‘‘signal’’ to others, it is also experienced as a
`‘‘symptom’’ in the body that generates it (Hess, 2001).
`Expressing happiness at a wedding reflects the appropriate
`social script, while it simultaneously provokes arousal in
`one’s body. At the same time, expression is not under the
`actor’s complete control as it often follows a subjective
`emotion experience. After a social blunder, the experience
`of
`embarrassment
`is
`spontaneously (as opposed to
`strategically) expressed by blushing or by gaze avoidance
`(Keltner and Buswell, 1997; Tracy and Robins, 2004).
`Avatars are a pictorial representation of
`the body.
`Symptoms and symbols are not
`interlocked into one
`biological system. Because of this, an avatar’s signals
`might be created by its owner to align to his/her intended
`expression without spontaneously activating the corre-
`sponding emotion. When chatting online, one may laugh at
`another’s spelling error privately, but may easily choose
`not to display the emotion of amusement via his/her
`avatar. This possibility also opens up more opportunities
`for misrepresenting oneself, as an untalented actor no
`longer needs to rely on his/her poor expressive talent, but
`on the in-built expressivity of the avatar. An avatar may
`reflect a happy demeanour despite its owner’s disgruntled
`personality. Moreover, online, there is an indefinite time
`window between the act of identity construction and the
`actual display of front which offers the user time to reflect
`on the precise qualities he/she wants to emit (Ellison et al.,
`2006). These qualities put together can contribute to self-
`presentation that is exceptionally strategic and tailored to
`convey precise messages.
`
`2.3. Ambiguity
`
`Avatar customisation environments are populated with
`options of fantasy, e.g. science-fiction costumes, as well as
`conventional and familiar real-life objects, e.g. jeans and a
`t-shirt. Often, these contrasting items are equally accessible
`and prominent in the interface. By contrast, in the physical
`world, an actor selects a setting for the performance that
`already exists in the real world, while clothes fit for the
`occasion are worn. Rarely is the actor confronted with
`fictitious items for constructing his/her front such as a
`magic wand or an alien mask. Therefore, unlike the
`physical world, avatars introduce an element of ambiguity.
`Ambiguity and the space it opens up for interpretation
`has become an important design goal in HCI, especially for
`
`social systems whose purpose is to provoke interpersonal
`dialogue (Gaver et al., 2003; Boehner and Hancock, 2006).
`Regarding avatars, the continuum of real and fantasy
`invites users to reflect on their social roles, reinventing their
`social preconceptions. For example, an avatar may be used
`to challenge its owner’s traditional family role. This self-
`reflection can transcend into real life, shaping his/her future
`encounters with family members (Turkle, 1995; Taylor,
`2002). Furthermore, the user can become a designer using
`the avatar as a tool to provoke the viewer; inconsistencies
`and metaphors built into the avatar may create a narrative
`that challenges the viewer’s interpretation.
`
`3. Methods
`
`The present research strived to understand the entire
`breadth and diversity of users’ self-presentation strategies
`when creating an avatar for social media. Thus, it was
`important to have direct access to users’ thoughts during
`the process of customisation. In choosing a methodology,
`we drew from the field of usability which has recently
`focused on creating novel methods for user experience
`design and evaluation (e.g.
`self-assessment manikin:
`Bradley and Lang, 1994; experience clips: Isomursu et al.,
`2007;
`interviews: Sundstrom et al., 2007;
`fuzzy logic
`emotion modelling: Mandryk and Atkins, 2007).
`The methods we came across did not allow us to collect
`qualitative data concurrently to users’ interaction with the
`avatar tool; hence, we borrowed a method traditionally
`used in usability studies,
`the concurrent
`think aloud
`protocol. The think aloud protocol was suitable for our
`purposes as it requires users to verbalise their actions and
`thoughts while using an interface.
`
`3.1. Participants
`
`The study was advertised in bulletin boards throughout
`the University of Geneva. In total, 20 participants took
`part in the think aloud study, nine of whom were male.
`Participants were aged between 20 and 40 years old, all
`were experienced computer participants and none had
`previous experience with avatars. As the sessions were
`conducted in French, only fluent French speakers were
`recruited.
`
`3.2. Procedure
`
`An adapted version of the think aloud protocol, tailored
`for the needs of usability studies, was used to elicit
`participants’ verbalisations (see Boren and Ramey, 2000).
`When participants first arrived they were given a training
`task instructing them to think aloud by speaking out their
`onscreen actions. The facilitator made sure to position
`himself as the listener who will partake little in the
`protocol, while the participant was given the role of the
`expert speaker. During the session, the facilitator reaf-
`firmed his role as the listener by occasionally providing
`
`APPL-1047
`APPLE INC./Page 3 of 11
`
`

`

`804
`
`A. Vasalou et al. / Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 66 (2008) 801–811
`
`ARTICLE IN PRESS
`
`acknowledgment tokens (e.g. hmm). If the participant was
`silent for too long, the facilitator prompted him/her. Two
`observers located in a room adjacent to the lab viewed and
`recorded the session. The recordings were later used for the
`qualitative analysis.
`The avatar tool used in this study was Yahoo! Avatars
`(http://avatars.yahoo.fr). Yahoo! Avatars gives users con-
`trol over their avatar’s body with variable facial features,
`eye colour, hairstyle and colour, skin tone, clothes and
`accessories. In addition to a neutral emotional expression,
`an avatar’s
`face can be assigned to four different
`expressions. Furthermore, avatars can be placed against
`different background locations. Other artefacts are also
`offered for the purpose of personalisation, such as pets,
`flags, furniture items, among others. The options offered in
`Yahoo! Avatars cover a wide spectrum of everyday items,
`such as pets, hobbies and city locations, as well as fantasy
`options, such as masks and costumes. Therefore, choosing
`Yahoo! Avatars ensured that participants’ choices were not
`constrained by the possibly limited options offered by the
`application. Fig. 1 displays a screenshot of the Yahoo!
`Avatars customisation tool.
`Participants were presented with two scenarios for
`creating an avatar which depicted events they had most
`likely encountered in the past i.e. a romantic date and a
`birthday postcard to a family member. Additionally, the
`scenarios were built on the grounds of previous research in
`social media. For example, bloggers often write posts with
`the purpose to record their life happenings (Herring et al.,
`2004; Nardi et al., 2004). Even though blogs are frequently
`targeted to an audience, sometimes writing is a solitary
`task, a form of ‘‘catharsis’’ for working out one’s emotions.
`Problems that occupy the user in daily life are expressed
`online in order to resolve and to relieve the source of
`emotion (Huffaker and Calvert, 2005). To capture these
`
`Table 1
`Social media scenarios
`
`Scenario 1: You are going out on a first and much anticipated romantic
`date. There are many questions you have to plan for. Where should we
`meet? What should I wear? How friendly should I look? What should I
`talk about? You decide to display your date online via your Yahoo! avatar
`Scenario 2: Your mom’s birthday is coming up and you have decided to
`surprise her with a holiday at a Greek island. You have orchestrated all
`the details: the perfect season for good weather, delicious local food
`guaranteed and a quiet hotel room by the seashore. Instead of telling her
`in person, you want to surprise her by presenting your vacation offer in a
`more fun and unexpected ‘packaging’. You will send a postcard with
`Yahoo! Avatars
`
`the first scenario prompted participants to
`dynamics,
`express a particular life event via their avatar. Further-
`more, social media often links participants to familiar
`offline contacts. For instance, communicating and recon-
`necting with friends is a motivating factor for using the
`social networking site Facebook (Joinson, 2008). Similarly,
`many bloggers’ pages serve as a channel for keeping in
`touch with their loved ones (Nardi et al., 2004). This social
`capacity of social media was captured by requesting
`participants to construct a message for a family member.
`Table 1 displays the two scenarios.
`Participants took 8.8 min on average to complete the first
`task and spent an average of 7.6 min on the second task.
`The minimum time spent on a task was 3.4 min, while the
`maximum was 17.45 min. A paired t-test on task comple-
`tion time was non-significant. Therefore, participants spent
`about equal time on both tasks.
`
`3.3. Qualitative protocol analysis
`
`During the think aloud session, participants’ face and
`voice was recorded, as was their onscreen activity. The two
`observers of the sessions revisited these recordings to
`identify moments relevant to participants’ chosen self-
`presentation strategies. The context of the interaction,
`participants’ verbal reports and participants’ non-verbal
`expressions, e.g. smiling, were all consulted when extract-
`ing relevant incidents. Usability problems with the inter-
`face, e.g. this button does not work, were discarded. This
`process resulted in a total of 202 incidents which were then
`transcribed and translated in English. Next, the incidents
`were grouped by similarity forming four high-level
`categories of self-presentation strategies. These are: stable
`self-attributes, idealisation, messages to others and fun. In
`the next section, we analyse the results by categorising the
`incidents according to this classification.
`
`4. Results
`
`4.1. Stable self-attributes
`
`Fig. 1. Yahoo! Avatars customisation tool.
`
`Participants expressed a number of stable self-aspects
`that were not influenced by the two scenarios. These
`
`APPL-1047
`APPLE INC./Page 4 of 11
`
`

`

`ARTICLE IN PRESS
`
`A. Vasalou et al. / Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 66 (2008) 801–811
`
`805
`
`were: (1) personalising a face, (2) fashion statements, (3)
`values and (4) real life events.
`
`4.1.1. Personalising a face
`Yahoo! Avatars provide eight face choices, each of
`which displays different characteristics. Generally,
`the
`accurate reflection of oneself via a face was an important
`choice, and, thus, one worth the time investing in. Five
`participants chose a face at the onset, only to revisit the
`eight faces later, in search of a closer match to their actual
`visage. Unlike other avatar items that were malleable and
`context-driven, once chosen, the face remained constant
`across the two scenarios. When approaching a face,
`participants either referenced themselves or considered
`the avatar as an external agent with a character of its own.
`We consider each strategy separately.
`People define themselves in different ways, which in turn
`can be projected onto their avatar. For example, one’s
`identity can be linked to a particular facial characteristic.
`A testament to our ability to recognise distinctive features
`and use them as identity cues are the range of adjectives we
`use to ‘‘classify’’ people we know e.g. he has an oval face,
`she has alabaster
`skin. To that effect, one of our
`participants, while selecting a face, said:
`
`y well, I do not find eyes which resemble miney The
`face does not resemble too much my own (sighs) but it
`will doy
`
`This participant defined himself by the uniqueness of his
`almond-shaped eyes. He attributed the lack of resemblance
`between himself and his avatar to the mismatch in eye
`shape completing his choice with a feeling of disappoint-
`ment. Participants following this style looked for defining
`personal features, such as a particular facial shape or a
`beard they wore. The feeling resulting from one’s inability
`to accurately represent his/herself was disappointment.
`Alternatively, identity may instead be linked to one’s
`understanding of his/her own characteristics. Here,
`mood and disposition as expressed by the avatar face
`became more important than the similarity with partici-
`pants’ physical facial features. Although the eight avatar
`faces available were given numbered labels by Yahoo!
`designers, some participants assigned them emotional
`
`meaning (see Fig. 2). In the following extract, one of our
`participants, a Caucasian female, chose an Asian face on
`the basis of its mood. The avatar was perceived as happy
`and thus reflected her state of mind, even though it did not
`accurately represent her own physical appearance.
`
`yfaces are different, with different emotions; I will
`maybe choose a face with a little smiley
`
`In the examples given so far, participants sought to
`express their own perceived qualities and characteristics
`through their avatar. Hence, the avatar’s face should reflect
`certain aspects of its owner. However, people often also
`associate personality traits to a face in the absence of any
`other cues (Taylor, 2002). For instance, one participant
`jokingly described the avatars’ faces thus:
`
`yone avatar looks rather ‘‘well-behaved’’ (laughs); this
`one looks like a playboy (laughs)y
`
`In this context, avatar faces were treated as independent
`agents with a distinct personality and corresponding
`behaviours. In the above example, the participant’s final
`choice was to choose an avatar face that resembled his
`own. Thus, one strategy does not preclude another and a
`few participants vacillated from one strategy to the other.
`In addition to the faces available, participants could
`personalise other facial attributes such as the eye colour,
`hairstyle and colour, and skin tone. Unlike faces, these
`additional attributes were only partially enduring. Partici-
`pants reflected their natural eye and hair colour, rarely
`revising these two choices. A similar observation was made
`for the skin tone as well as the hairstyle. For instance, as
`one participant noted ‘‘I will first select the colour of the
`skin. I have light skin so I will keep it this way.’’ However,
`during our analysis, we also discovered that skin tone
`and hairstyle were often malleable features driven by
`strategic motivations. This particular observation is
`analysed in-depth in Sections 4.2 and 4.3.
`
`4.1.2. Fashion statements
`4.1.2.1. Clothes express personality. People have particu-
`lar ideas when it comes to considering the kind of
`person they are. One may think of oneself as a mature
`person, while another may want to project youthfulness.
`
`Fig. 2. Male and female avatar faces.
`
`APPL-1047
`APPLE INC./Page 5 of 11
`
`

`

`806
`
`A. Vasalou et al. / Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 66 (2008) 801–811
`
`ARTICLE IN PRESS
`
`A participant wearing eye wear in real life searched for
`glasses. He frowned when viewing the options available
`noting the disparity to his self-image: ‘‘No, the glasses look
`too young.’’ Another participant was unsuccessful
`in
`finding glasses to match his real life glass frame. As he
`explained, ‘‘Here it could be good to vary more, to have
`various
`types of glass
`frames.’’
`In both instances,
`participants opted out of the eye wear option. In a similar
`vein, while one participant embraced the designers’
`decision to include male jewellery allowing him to reflect
`a real
`life piercing, another participant criticised male
`jewellery as being ‘‘too feminine’’.
`
`4.1.2.2. Combinations should reflect good taste. Clothes,
`shoes and accessories were chosen to match in both style
`and colour. As in real life, when choosing combinations,
`participants were careful to reflect good taste. Exemplify-
`ing this, one of our participants exclaimed in disgust upon
`trying on a blue Hawaiian shirt and black Hawaiian
`trousers ‘‘Yuck! (laughs) That does not match well.’’
`Another participant who was looking for glasses to match
`with his outfit said:
`
`yI would like to find something which will correspond
`well to what I am wearingy Glasses, black frames
`(searching) therefore I should choose this.
`
`felt compelled to take the most
`This participant
`complimentary option. His choice was motivated by style
`and, thus, glasses that were incongruent with his outfit were
`not favourable.
`
`‘‘I am a shoe person’’;
`items.
`4.1.2.3. ‘‘Got-to-have’’
`‘‘Earrings are my trademark’’. Statements of passion about
`particular clothing items are expressed all the time. Fashion
`favourites were sought after when creating online avatars.
`One participant, a self-reported shoe lover, exclaimed:
`
`Are there shoes? Is my avatar wearing shoes? Can one
`change the shoes?y Because shoes are important to me.
`But, there seems to be no such option (sigh).
`
`In Yahoo! Avatars, shoes come automatically with
`corresponding clothes and are one of the few options that
`are not customisable. Yet, this participant’s disappoint-
`ment was echoed throughout the study by eight others who
`repeatedly searched for ways to customise their shoes.
`Crucially, a few participants cancelled their clothing
`options when the corresponding shoes were not to their
`liking. In a similar vein, some female participants looked
`for makeup, a male participant searched for a piercing
`similar to his own.
`
`4.1.3. Values
`4.1.3.1. Group affiliations. San Francisco, Venice and
`Moscow are a few of
`the worldwide destinations on
`display. In the following example, a participant first
`searched for Swiss clothes. He said ‘‘doubt that there are
`Swiss clothes, which is quite a pity!’’ Shortly after, he
`
`turned his attention to the backgrounds available and
`searched again with the same purpose: ‘‘On the other hand,
`I have the impression that those are backgrounds so if
`there is one of Switzerland it could be nice!’’ This
`participant wanted to express his cultural belonging via
`his avatar. When realising there were no Swiss options
`available, he abandoned his search with disappointment.
`Another, Mexican participant drew on his cultural
`upbringing when conveying the surprise holiday to his
`mom;
`instead of a Greek island, he chose to display
`Acapulco.
`
`4.1.3.2. Moral principles. Yahoo! offers a branded items
`section comprised by clothing and accessories
`from
`popular brands, which can be used to dress one’s avatar.
`This new generation of advertising is inconspicuously
`embedded in the avatar environment (Hemp, 2006), but it
`does not come without criticism. While looking at the
`branded items, five participants expressed their opposition
`towards advertising and freedom of choice. As one
`explained:
`
`So, this really makes me think that Yahoo! Avatars can
`become an advertising tooly prime people to get
`interested into the branded stuff. That is not something
`that I like much.
`
`ideological viewpoints
`In this instance, participants’
`negatively affected their self-presentation choices and their
`trust in Yahoo! As opposed to this negative outlook on
`online advertising, another participant cast a different view
`on brand advertising: ‘‘brands do not interest me, except if
`they have Decathlon (his favourite brand).’’ It is thus
`possible that inhibitions are bypassed when advertising is
`personalised with the inclusion of favourite offline brand
`names.
`
`fervently
`fans
`4.1.3.3. Emotional attachments. Sports
`vouch for their team. Motorcycle riders take yearly group
`tours to show their solidarity to one another. Hobbies
`require both a positive emotional bias and time commit-
`ment. Yahoo! Avatars provides many choices for showcas-
`ing one’s hobbies, which in turn appeared to be welcomed
`by participants. An ice skater chose an ice ring; a baseball
`fan dressed up in uniform; a motorcycle rider placed a
`motorcycle next to his virtual self. A hockey fan who
`selected a hockey stadium background said ‘‘good, they
`have hockey because I practise it; I adore hockey (laughs).
`Making this choice shows a little of my personality.’’
`Another object of emotional attachment was animals.
`Animals require time commitment and constant care, but
`in return they offer us friendship and companionship. We
`attribute personality to animals which we learn to accept
`and love. The importance of this emotional bond was also
`evident in this study when several participants chose their
`real life companions as their online companions. As one
`participant noted ‘‘I am looking for a dog that actually
`looks like my dog which is a Chihuahua.’’ Another
`
`APPL-1047
`APPLE INC./Page 6 of 11
`
`

`

`ARTICLE IN PRESS
`
`A. Vasalou et al. / Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 66 (2008) 801–811
`
`807
`
`participant selected a cat when customising her avatar for
`the birthday scenario as she always takes her cat with her
`when on holiday.
`
`4.1.4. Real life events
`Customisation options present in the site were used to
`express real life occurrences. For example, a few partici-
`pants chose darker skin tone to reflect the summer season.
`Another participant expressed his recent visit to the barber
`with the corresponding avatar option: ‘‘Good, today I went
`to the hairdresser, therefore, I choose this one: very short
`brown hair.’’ Though the study took place during the
`summer, when attending on a rainy day, one participant
`chose long pants and a hat to keep himself protected from
`the weather.
`
`4.2. Idealisation
`
`In Goffman’s (1959) terms, participants idealised their
`self-presentation by intentionally emphasising or conceal-
`ing self-attributes. We found three patterns of idealisation:
`(1) global
`idealisation,
`(2) social
`idealisation and (3)
`idealisation versus breaking the rules.
`
`4.2.1. Global idealisation
`Several participants slightly morphed their avatar to
`display an ‘‘ideal’’ and more attractive self (Higgins, 1987).
`For example, avatars were given a darker skin tone
`expressing their owners’ desire for a more vibrant summer
`look. One participant acknowledged this embellishment by
`saying ‘‘I will pretend to look more suntanned.’’ Further-
`more, a male participant with a receding hair line in real
`life started off wit