Really, I'm funny and laid-back!

A facebook profile contains several sections, and like much of the internet, assessment signals are more difficult to come by. Nearly everything – favorites, activities, education, work, basic information – is comprised of conventional signals. The user can put whatever he wants in these fields regardless of whether they apply to the user; there is no direct method of proof or outside confirmation available.

There are several consistent assessment signals, however, the most obvious being the user's network. Joining a particular network requires a valid email address from that network, so one can't fake being a member, though one could theoretically lie about what their role is in the network. In the contact section there is a potential for assessment signals – while one could lie regarding their phone and residence, for example, it is easy to check these via a call or visit. The relationship status can function as an assessment signal, if one chooses to specify who they are in a relationship with, which the other person must confirm. Similar, a user's "number of friends" can be an assessment signal, as users must confirm that they are friends with any given user.

I interviewed a friend (we'll call him Jim) regarding the accuracy of his profile, and his initial response was “Everything is a 5.” As I prodded over the individual sections, however, he loosened his ratings for a few categories, namely:
Looking for: 3
Religion: 3 (Omitted from his profile)
Favorite Music: 4

I discussed certain aspects of his profile, and we conjectured together over possible backing motives.

Self-descriptions: This has to do with what is said. For example, Jim had his “Looking for” section say “Friendship,” despite the fact that I know Jim is looking for dating, as well. When I asked him why he didn't include that, he said that he didn't think something like that should be made public; he felt he would come off as desperate or even pathetic. By saying he was looking for “Friendship” he felt he came off as a more confident, social person.

Attitude Expressions: This is more of a “how things are said.” For example, Jim has about 40 bands listed in his “Favorite Music” section, when compared to only a handful of favorites in the other sections. Many of them are very obscure “Indie” bands; while he does listen to many of them, he lists them as his favorites also hoping that people viewing his profile will associate him with the the cool, trendy members of the “Indie scene.” Also, by leaving out religion in his basic information, he can convey the attitude that religion is not important to him, despite the fact that he's actually an atheist.

Social associations: One can consider the groups he chose to join, which fall into two categories. First, there are groups reflecting actual groups (Cornell groups, groups from his high school, etc) which allow him to display his real-life social associations (and suggest he has characteristics in line with those of the group's members). Second, there are “funny” groups, (for example, “DC++ destroyed my education”). He joins the latter in hopes that, by associating himself with “funny” groups, he, too, will be thought of as funny and laid-back (this also falls into attitude expressions).

Sets, props, lighting; Nonverbal behaviors: All there is to work with here, really, is the profile picture. Jim chose a picture of himself wearing a stupid expression, home-made dunce cap, tie, and sweater. When I asked him why he chose such an idiotic picture, he said that he hoped through his almost dazed, unflattering facial expression, people would think of him as being relaxed; someone who doesn't care what people think about him. The outfit and hat he hoped would additionally convey that he has a sense of humor.

From what I know about him, he is pretty honest in much of his provided information, though surely he tries to convey a sense of humor and a laid back attitude so heavily because, from what I know of him, he's actually not the funniest guy, and he tends to stress out pretty easily. The depth of his profile definitely counters the media-richness theory, which would argue that his profile would probably just state facts about him (very unequivocal aspects) and have very little deception, whereas his profile uses many tactics to attempt to subtly suggest to users that he possesses certain attributes he believes he should possesses and wishes he did (ie, aspects of his ought and ideal selves). This is more in line with the impression management model, as he uses facebook to control how people view him, via selective self-presentation, and the social distance theory, as he can lie more easily being “disconnected” from the interaction. His deception is frequent but subtle, and strategic, exactly as expected from the “Empircal & Theoretical” section.