The notion of online community Photo: TUCHONG

Digital virtual communities are those formed by participants in the virtual world, facilitated by information technology and digital platforms. Social relations and ongoing interactions between members exist in virtual communities, giving rise to particular structures and ecosystems. Unique community culture often emerges from the various activities and social dynamics within these virtual spaces. Therefore, virtual communities can be understood as communities in the sociological sense. However, they differ from traditional real-world communities in terms of temporal and special dimensions. Spatially, virtual communities transcend physical boundaries. Temporally, while a certain level of member co-presence is entailed, such co-presence is not necessarily synchronous or real-time. 

With the advances in digital technology, new modes of interaction and new forms of organization, collaboration and labor have emerged in virtual communities. It is thus necessary to not only examine virtual communities as communities in the general sense, but also explore new phenomena and theoretical issues. 

Approach 

Virtual ethnography, a qualitative method for the study of virtual communities, involves observing information exchange among online community members. On the one hand, virtual and traditional ethnography adopt similar methodologies and data collection techniques. For instance, participation, integration, experience, and immersive fieldwork are emphasized, and data is collected through observation and interviews. On the other hand, virtual ethnography enriches ethnographic methods, while also facing unique methodological and ethical challenges. 

The research objects of virtual ethnography are users and groups with virtual identities, and the research material consists of online texts produced in interactive scenarios, which differentiate virtual ethnography from traditional ethnography. While virtual ethnographic fieldwork is conducted in cyberspace rather than in physical space, it has cultural cohesion mechanisms and processes. The virtual field allows researchers to observe without disrupting the community. 

Challenges faced by virtual ethnography include access to demographic data of virtual communities, data reliability and authenticity, potential misunderstanding of texts, informed consent for research, and protection of anonymity. While the virtual world itself may serve as a laboratory for social science research, a number of issues remain to be further examined, such as how to determine the ethics of such research and ensure scientific rigor through research design. 

Key issues 

Current research on virtual communities is centered around four key issues. The first concerns the virtual economy and its governance. Virtual commodities and traditional commodities have different attributes, transaction value, and profit models. Content is regarded as the most important virtual commodity. The publishers, owners, and producers of content are not limited to companies. User-generated content further blurs the boundaries between consumers and producers. The value of resources and commodities in the virtual economy depends on the ability to attract and maintain users’ attention by featuring scarcity and novelty and offering desirable experiences. 

In terms of governance, at least two new issues need to be addressed. The first pertains to intellectual property rights accompanying the massive amount of creative labor in virtual communities. The second concerns the definition and protection of the rights and interests of participants in the virtual economy. As transactions are increasingly made on digital platforms, personal data becomes a resource akin to ownerless means of production that could be appropriated and exploited by platforms after it is processed and refined. 

The second issue relates to work and labor within virtual communities. Digital labor encompasses virtual labor. The former refers more broadly to labor mediated by digital technology, while the latter refers more specifically to labor performed in virtual communities. For example, online food delivery is not considered virtual labor, though it is organized and managed through digital platforms. Scholars are taking tentative steps towards defining new categories of work and labor in virtual communities. The term “playbor” has been coined to describe the labor of virtual community participants playing a dual role of producer and user. 

The third issue pertains to self-presentation, identification, and cultural influences in virtual communities. An avatar is a role played by a participant in virtual communities. Users have the option to partially conceal real information, choose an identity they prefer to present, and adjust or change their avatar using custom components which vary across communities. The use of avatars is closely related to issues of self and identity, subjects long studied in sociology. 

The fourth issue relates to the social implications of “virtual” and “real” and the construction of boundaries. In what ways are “virtual” and “real” defined and constructed in different eras and cultures? Sociologists and anthropologists place emphasis on the contextual understanding of “virtual”: “virtual” relative to what in specific social contexts? Virtual communities are part of people’s real life on the one hand, and relatively independent spaces on the other. As technology continues to advance, interactions between virtual communities and real-world communities are expected to become increasingly complex. Research on virtual communities could provide insight into how people coordinate real and virtual lives, and how everyday practices that span the virtual and real worlds may shape social life in general. 

Zhang Jieying is from the Institute of Sociology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Li Xueshi is from the School of Humanities and Social Science of The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen. 

Edited by WANG YOURAN