The online support group as a community: A micro-analysis of the interaction with a new member

Abstract

Generally, online support groups are viewed as low-threshold services. We challenge this assumption with an investigation, based on Conversation Analysis and Membership Categorization Analysis, of contributions to an online support group on eating disorders. In this analysis we show how a new member interacts with existing members in order to display legitimacy for membership of the group. The group operates as a Community of Practice, since membership is organized as joined participation in a writing practice. It becomes clear that becoming a member involves subscribing to normative requirements, centrally, displaying the insight that you are ill. In the case we focus on, this involves the requirement to leave pro-anorexia as a membership category behind. The novice does not yet seem ready to subscribe to this norm and thus the threshold for seeking support is heightened.

Men’s depression talk online: A qualitative analysis of accountability and authenticity in help-seeking and support formulations.

“…Horne & Wiggins, 2009;Stommel & Koole, 2010), and modest datasets are common with respect to qualitative research across a range of methodologies, where the focus is on intensive rather than extensive analysis (e.g. Smith, 2004).…”

The delicate business of identity

“…as a parent or teacher in a discussion about education). Other studies similarly showed how posters mobilised self-identities to establish their legitimacy in seeking help through an online support group (Stommel and Koole, 2010), or friends through an online emo discussion forum (Chernoff and Widdicombe, 2015), and how this was an important precursor for generating responses from members. Stokoe (2010) showed how a suspect invoked his gender identity ('not the kind of bloke who hits a woman') to mitigate potentially blameworthy behaviour in a police interview.…”

Knowledge and Discourse Matters

“…Stommel and Koole (2010) report a study of contributions posted to an eating disorder support site, hosted in Germany. Using a combination of Conversation Analysis and Membership Categorisation Analysis, Stommel and Koole are interested in how new members to the site negotiate membership in terms of expectations and requirements.…”

“…In reality, the two methods are not mutually exclusive, nor do they necessarily overlap with one another. There are, in fact, examples of useful and insightful studies which combine both types of analysis in their methodology (e.g., Stommel and Koole, 2010). …”

“…Research in CMC tends to be clustered around academic sites (e.g., McKenzie and Murphy, 2000;Montero Watts and Garcia-Carbonnell , 2007;Marra, Moore and Klimczak, 2004;Lester and Paulus, 2011;Schrire, 2006;Paulus, 2007;Veerman and Veldhuis-Diermanse, 2001;Jordan, Schallert, Park, Lee, Chaing and Cheng, 2012); online support groups for people with physical or mental health issues such as eating disorders (e.g., Stommel and Koole, 2010;Giles, 2006), self-harming (e.g., Smithson, Sharkey, Hewis, Jones, Emmens, Ford and Owens 2011) and depression (e.g., Morrow, 2006;Chirrey, 2011); and blogs (e.g., Myers, 2010). Appearing less frequently as a focus of research are sites such as product review sites (e.g., Otterbacher, 2011) and professional practice forums (e.g., Crane, 2011;.…”