As I mapped my use of technology as it pertains to the resident-visitor typology (White & Le Cornu, 2011), I realised that my use of some platforms and services fluctuates. I used varied weighting of sizes to reflect my current use of these entities.
Email and searching likely have the heaviest footprint. They also span more than one quadrant, since they are vital to both personal and institutional pursuits.
The personal-residents quadrant is the most populated, which is expected, as social-media platforms (or platforms that have a social element) have become prevalent in our digital lives. I note that while Reddit appears in this mapping, there is not a digital trace to personally associate its use to me. Like most Reddit users, I use a non-personal username to keep my identity concealed. I also avoid including personally-identifiable details in the content I post.
Some entities featured in the map are smaller, due to my waning use of them. Twitter/X, for example, is something I once used heavily but have now scrubbed (deleted 11,700 tweets from 2008 onward) and parked—but it still exists as part of my footprint*.
An Alternative Tension Pair
If I were to use Dave Cormier’s alternative analogue/digital tension pair, my mapping would change dramatically, as it would reflect a more wholistic view of my life. Depending on the types of technology mapped (home appliances, vehicles, clothing, etc), it could be a vastly larger map.
I will save that for another day.
*I have since deleted my Twitter/X account.
References
Cormier, D. (2018, March 31). Digital Practices Mapping – Intro activity for digital literacies course. Dave’s Educational Blog. davecormier.com/edblog/2018/03/31/digital-practices-mapping-intro-activity-for-digital-literacies-course/
White, D. S., & Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, 16(9). doi.org/10.5210/fm.v16i9.3171
Attributions
Meta. (2021). Facebook logo. Wikimedia Commons. Retrieved from commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2021_Facebook_icon.svg
Meta. (2016). Instagram logo. Wikimedia Commons. Retrieved from commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Instagram_logo_2016.svg
Noun Project. (n.d.). Binoculars. Ex Eyecon. Retrieved from thenounproject.com/icon/binoculars-898688/
Noun Project. (n.d.). Email. Kids Boy. Retrieved from thenounproject.com/icon/email-5366276/
Read.cv. (n.d.). Posts by Read.cv logo. Read.cv. Retrieved from read.cv/logos/posts.svg
Reddit. (n.d.). Reddit logo. Retrieved from worldvectorlogo.com/logo/reddit-1
Wikipedia. (2007). Wikipedia W logo. Retrieved from commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikipedia%27s_W.svg
WordPress. (n.d.). WordPress logo. Retrieved from commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wordpress-Logo.svg
X. (2023). X logo. Retrieved from commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:X_logo_2023.svg
Stephen, interesting to see how our relationship which social media changes. I also am slowly moving toward more anonymity online, or at least a very shallow footprint in the social-resident sphere. I tend to use social media apps more as a shared photo album with family and friends, but don’t engage as I did 10 years ago.
Interesting comment, Heidi. What are the factors that have led to lower social media ctivity over time? For me, I think a growing awareness of data harvesting combined with some level of online burnout has led me to become less of an online resident than I was some years ago.
Glad to hear you mention Cormier’s alterative tension pairs, Stephen. I was thinking a bit about this issue over the past week and realized that the difference between synchronous and asynchronous online spaces has an impact on how much I prefer to collaborate versus work on my own. As synchronous tools, like Zoom and Teams, have improved over the past few years, I have found myself less interested in collaborating asynchronously. This is a bit of a paradox for an introvert like me, but I believe it is mostly motivated by the relative ease of synchronous interaction. While I appreciate the chance to read materials and compose my input asynchronously without time pressure, it is so much more time consuming to come to consensus when compared to synchronous interaction. If collaboration is needed on a project, I much prefer to do so synchronously.
As a fellow introvert, I feel the same way.
It is interesting in the theatre (especially improv) community, how prevalent introverts are. That is a community one would assume is largely composed of extroverts.
One might expect that an introvert would have little interest in synchronous, people-dependent collaboration—whether on a stage, in front of an audience, or in focus-intensive academia. I wonder if there is something about these creative types of collaboration that tends to draw introverts toward finding comfort outside of our shells.