This research has three goals: first, to find out how prevalent online deception is within a sample of Israeli users, second, to explore the underlying motivations to deceive online, and third, to discover the emotions that accompany online deception. A web-based survey was distributed in 14 discussion groups, and the answers of 257 respondents were analyzed. It was found that, while most of the respondents believe that online deception is very widespread, only about one-third of them reported engaging in online deception. Frequent users deceive online more than infrequent users, young users more than old, and competent users more than non-competent. The most common motivations to deceive online were "play" on the one hand and privacy concerns on the other. Most people felt a sense of enjoyment while engaging in online deception. The results are discussed in light of a possible mechanism for changing personal moral standards.

No abstract

This paper presents a theoretical framework for viewing elements that comprise distance education instructional systems in terms of dialogue. It is assumed that learning is mediated by intrapersonal dialogue and facilitated by interpersonal dialogue. Every resource in a distance education instructional system (eg, instructor availability, asynchronous communication networks, self-instruction texts, etc) is analysed in terms of the dialogue mode it supports. The framework offers three advantages: (1) a unified, simple, and coherent description of the mechanisms at play in distance education systems, (2) clearcut operational definitions, and (3) hypotheses that may be investigated empirically.

Upon completion of a graduate level course at the Open University of Israel, one instructor received very high student ratings while the other received very low ratings. We utilized this exceptional situation to perform ad hoc analyses of their course forums. The objective of this study was to map the dialogic behavior that occurred and to create suggestions for best practice and for worst practice in terms of active and passive participation, instructor response time, and the extent of teaching presence, social presence, and cognitive presence.

No abstract