Explaining the Benefits and Harms Online Communication Brings to Young People from a Durkheimian Perspective

Duan Chenyang

摘 要：This essay is going to address the changes and issues brought by the emerging internet communication and online networking sites among young people. Research shows that there has been an improvement in the efficiency of communication in the young peoples daily life as internet communication popularises. On the other hand， the advancement of internet communication service is also known to be a source of mental issues among adolescents. In this essay， the coexistence of both sides of the effects online communication imposed will be accounted from a Durkheimian perspective. Durkheims ideas of social solidarity and anomie are applied to explain how internet communication holds the adolescent tighter together as well as creates the virtual communication that causes more metal issues in the contemporary society.

關(guān)鍵詞：Online Communiation， Durkheim， Social Solidarity， Anomie， Adolescent

After the profound transformation the world underwent due to the Industrial Revolution， new societal changes have been brought by the Information Revolution. As the World Wide Web popularises across the world， online social networking sites made it possible for users to connect and share content online and allows online communities to form. The online communication and network services play a more and more important role in the contemporary social structure. Such trend is particularly significant among the younger group of the society. Data from a research carried out internationally showed 83% of young people （age of 18-29） use social network services （Duggan & Brenner， 2013）. Another research showed in 2011， an average 15-year-old spend approximately 2 hours daily online （ONeill， Livingstone & Mclaughlin， 2011）. Online networking services have become an important way of communication and creating social connections. Positive effects of online communication have been found by various research – it promotes community interaction， involvement and social capital （Kavanaugh et al， 2005; Hampton & Wellman， 2003）. Existing social ties are maintained， and new connection are formed via online networking sites （Ellison， Steinfield & Lampe， 2007）. A study of Facebook usage among 800 Michigan State University undergraduate students was carried out and 94% of the student sample were Facebook users （Ibid）. It is reported that participants viewed Facebook as an effective tool to keep contact with old acquaintance and intensify relationships that formed offline （Ibid）. The student participants also showed that Facebook provided a more integrated and broadened social experience in university （Ibid）. Ties between university Facebook users are maintained cheaply and easily （Ibid）. The intensity of Facebook usage was found to be positively affecting maintaining the social capital as well as satisfaction of university experience for the student participants （Ibid）. Social media applications like Facebook give students with lower self-esteem and confidence more opportunities to connect with others via the virtual platform. Users social networks are able to be expanded in a way that would not be possible otherwise.

The coexisting benefits and harms of the online networking sites can be understood from a Durkheimian perspective. The first Durkheimian idea to account for the benefits of online networking sites on social connection and communication is social solidarity. In Durkheims （1984） major work， The Division of Labour in Society， he introduced the ideas of social solidarity. Social solidarity refers to the shared values and rules that can be accessed to everyone in the society and keep the society together. With such cohesion in the societal structure， people are able to live in the society with shared values and roles， which bond and connect individuals and hold them together （Drissel， 2013）. Durkheim （1984） identified the major component of social solidarity is collective conscience. This term is used to describe “the totality of beliefs and sentiments common to average citizens of the same society” and it “forms a determinate system which has its own life” （Durkheim， 1984， p 38-39）. Durkheim （1984） suggested that such collective beliefs exist in the society and are independent from individuals personal account. Durkheim observed the changes in society from traditional to industrialised world and identified two different types of social solidarity. In the pre-modern societies， the social solidarity is described to be “mechanical”. Individuals in these societies perform similar tasks and shares the feeling of “l(fā)ikeness” among them. Common source of identity exists in these societies and allow people to connect with each other based on such similarities of perspectives and situations. Individuals gain cohesion and bond with others through similar social status or religions （Schroeder & Ling， 2014）. As individuals in society all complete somehow similar tasks， they have little specialisation and division of labour. In contrast to the mechanical solidarity based on resemblance， a more modern industrial society experiences organic solidarity.? In industrial societies， division of labour arises where individuals complete different tasks based on their specialisation. As a result， the social relations become much more diversified than in traditional societies. There is a stronger emphasis on individualism， which indicates that people have more autonomy to make choices for their own life as well as take responsibilities of their own choices.? Durkheim argues that the differentiated sources of roles and identities do not mean that individuals are less likely to bond together. In fact， such specialisation made people in society more interdependent. Despite noting there is a need to “mark cleanly the barriers“ to separate people that operating different function in the society， Durkheim also claimed that the organic solidarity characterised the concept of interdependence? of societal component parts （Schroeder & Ling， 2014）. Such interdependency allows society to connect different individuals and hold them together （Durkheim， 1984）. From mechanical solidarity to organic solidarity， the society underwent a transformation and became more complex and more fragmented.

Although Durkheims theory focuses on the division of labour， the concept of social solidarity can be used to account for how the popularisation of social networking sites improve the communication among young people. The solidarity created by online networking sites is described to be a neo-mechanical solidarity that has characteristics of both Durkheimian mechanical and organic solidarity （Schroeder & Ling， 2014）. Such neo-mechanical solidarity， resembling mechanical solidarity， is largely based on the similarity between individuals. Internet networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter provide the platform for individuals to connect online according to common occupation or interests. Such “virtual communities” forms when “enough people carry on the public discussion long enough， with sufficient feelings， to form webs of personal relationships in cyberspace” （Rheingold， 2002， p24）. As the inevitable trend of popularisation of online communication and socialisation， common beliefs and ideas are effectively and easily shared among the young people who are the major components of internet use.? These collective ideas are viewed as a new form of collective conscience that reinforces the sense of community among internet users. In such ways， social connection and networks were expanded among young people via internet.

Such concept can also be applied to explain the negative effects internet imposed on young peoples well-being. The expansion of usage of social networking sites took place rapidly along with the information revolution in the late 20th century. As internet popularises， a new coercive power was imposed across the society and it largely influences as well as constrains personal behaviour （Drissel， 2013）. New ways of thinking emerged as the society was transformed by the technology advancement （Ibid）. Despite connecting a larger scale of internet users and forming online communities， such rapid revolutionary change brought by the internet also causes disturbance in the societal order. New ideologies and culture have been spread across the world in a much larger scale and faster speed. Internet communication also largely draws on the freedom of speech among the users. With such freedom to post or tweet， traditional ways of thinking and norms are challenged. However， such freedom also leads to a lack of orders and norms.? Adolescents， as the main component of online networking sites consumers， receive a large amount of information online. Such information disturbs the traditional norms which imposes uncertainties on young peoples understanding of the world. It becomes difficult for young people to find answers from the society. Such influence is also difficult to escape from for individuals as such transformation in society caused by internet advancement exhibits a coercive power. Such coerciveness can also be explained by Durkheims concept of social fact - external forces that impose constrain on individuals. As such uncertainty is forced upon young internet users and causing a lack of anchors. Additionally， the social solidarity created by internet is considered to be weak， as it is questionable if connection on Facebook or Twitter counts as meaningful communication （Drissel， 2013）. Such accounts can provide explanation on why online networking sites impose harmful effects on young peoples mental well-being.

However， the application of Durkhiems theory has certain limitations when accounting for the different effects online communication imposes on young people. Durkheims theory is often criticised to be over-emphasising on the social facts and collective consciences （Drissel， 2013， p89）. Individuals autonomy and personal choices has been overlooked （Drissel， 2013， p89）. Despite the internet advancement imposes a coercive force over the society and it is almost inevitable that people in the society have no choice but accept the new norms that created by it， individuals still have the freedom to choose to access certain filtered information without suffering from the uncertainty. In addition， the internet revolution took place rather gradual. It is ambiguous to determine how well young people in society adapt to it and how much harm such transformation actually brings.

Another limitation of Durkheims theory is that he was not interested in why people are acting such way when a lack of social order happens. The reason behind why too much information received online would lead to a sense of uncertainty cannot be explained by Durkheims theory. Further research should focus more on the fundamental causal relations of the societal transformation and individuals corresponding behaviour.

To sum up， this essay identified the benefits on young peoples social connection and communication as well as the harms it causes to their well-being. Such coexisting advantage and disadvantage of the popularisation of internet communication were explained via Durkheims theories of social solidarity and anomie. Although there are certain limitations with the application of the theory， this account can be considered to be effective in providing an in-depth understanding of this social phenomenon.

Reference

Appelrouth， S. & Edles， L.D.， 2016. Classical and contemporary sociological theory： text and readings Third.

Beard， K.W.， 2005. Internet Addiction： A Review of Current Assessment Techniques and Potential Assessment Questions. CyberPsychology & Behavior， 8（1）， pp.7-14.

Books.Durkheim， émile et al.， 1952. Suicide： a study in sociology， London： Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Brenner， V.， 1997. Psychology of computer use： XLVII. Parameters of Internet use， abuse and addiction： The first 90 days of the Internet Usage Survey. Psychological Reports， 80， 879- 882

Davis， R.A.， 2001. A cognitive-behavioral model of pathological Internet use. Computers in Human Behavior， 17（2）， pp.187-195.

作者簡介：

段晨陽，出生于1998年8月，女，漢族，籍貫山東省青島市市，現(xiàn)在在倫敦大學(xué)學(xué)院（University College London）大學(xué)三年級就讀，主修社會科學(xué)專業(yè)。