Comparing Avatar and Video Representations

  • Ralph Schroeder
Part of the Springer Series in Immersive Environments book series (SSIE)


The key to collaboration and enjoyment in virtual worlds is interpersonal interaction, which in turn depends to a large extent on bodily representations of users – or their avatar appearance. Videoconferencing is also becoming more ­popular, and people also increasingly represent themselves online via photographs on social networking sites. Thus we confront a world in which avatar and photo-realistic (video) identities present a fundamental choice for users in mediated interactions. What difference does it make whether a person is represented by an avatar – as against a video-realistic presentation – of themselves? And what are the implications for how people interact with each other in spaces for collaboration, learning, socialising and play? This chapter examines the range of avatar representations and representations in video-mediated communication and discusses the various findings related to both. It also draws out the implications of video-realistic versus computer-generated user representations for the future of mediated interaction.


Virtual Environment Virtual World Social Networking Site Online Gaming Mediate Interaction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Axelsson, A.-S., Regan, T.: Playing online. In: Vorderer, P., Bryant, J. (eds.) Playing Video Games: Motives, Responses, Consequences, pp. 291–306. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah (2006)Google Scholar
  2. Baron, N.: Always On: Language in an Online and Mobile World. Oxford University Press, New York/Oxford (2008)Google Scholar
  3. Baym, N.: Personal Connections in the Digital Age. Polity Press, Cambridge (2010)Google Scholar
  4. Becker, B., Mark, G.: Social conventions in computer-mediated communication: a comparison of three online shared virtual environments. In: Schroeder, R. (ed.) The Social Life of Avatars: Presence and Interaction in Shared Virtual Environments, pp. 19–39. Springer, London (2002)Google Scholar
  5. Blascovich, J.: Social influence within immersive virtual environments. In: Schroeder, R. (ed.) The Social Life of Avatars: Presence and Interaction in Shared Virtual Environments, pp. 127–145. Springer, London (2002)Google Scholar
  6. Fielding, N., Macintyre, M.: Access grid nodes in field research. Sociol. Res. Online. 11(2) (2006).
  7. Finn, K., Sellen, A., Wilbur, S. (eds.): Video-Mediated Communication. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah (1997)Google Scholar
  8. Fischer, C.: America Calling: A Social History of the Telephone to 1940. University of California Press, Berkeley (1992)Google Scholar
  9. Friedman, D., Steed, A., Slater, M.: Spatial behaviour in second life. In: Pelachaud, C. (ed.) Intelligent Virtual Agents, pp. 252–263. Springer, New York (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Garau, M.: Selective fidelity: investigating priorities for the creation of expressive avatars. In: Schroeder, R., Axelsson, A.-S. (eds.) Avatars at Work and Play: Collaboration and Interaction in Shared Virtual Environments, pp. 17–38. Springer, London (2006)Google Scholar
  11. Heldal, I., Steed, S., Spante, M., Schroeder, R., Bengtsson, S., Partanen, M.: Successes and failures in co-present situations. Presence J. Teleop. Virt. Environ. 14(5), 563–579 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hindmarsh, J., Fraser, M., Heath, C., Benford, S.: Virtually missing the point: configuring CVEs for object-focused interaction. In: Churchill, E., Snowdon, D., Munro, A. (eds.) Collaborative Virtual Environments: Digital Places and Spaces for Interaction, pp. 115–139. Springer, London (2002)Google Scholar
  13. Hirsh, S., Sellen, A., Brokopp, N.: Why HP people do and don’t use videoconferencing systems. Technical Report HPL-2004-140R1, Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol (2005).
  14. Hogan, B.: The presentation of self in the age of social media: distinguishing performances and exhibitions online. Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc. 30(6), 377–386 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kirk, D., Sellen, A., Cao, X.: Home video communication: mediating closeness. Forthcoming in Proceedings of CSCW, pp.135–144 (2010)Google Scholar
  16. Lenhart, A., Madden. M.: Social networking and teens: an overview. Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2007)
  17. Ling, R.: New Tech, New Ties: How Mobile Technology is Reshaping Social Cohesion. MIT Press, Cambridge (2008)Google Scholar
  18. McQuail, D.: Mass Communication Theory, 2nd edn. Sage, London (1987)Google Scholar
  19. Sallnas, E.-L.: Collaboration in multi-modal virtual worlds: comparing touch and text and voice and video. In: Schroeder, R. (ed.) The Social Life of Avatars: Presence and Interaction in Shared Virtual Environments, pp. 172–187. Springer, London (2002)Google Scholar
  20. Schroeder, R.: Being There Together: Social Interaction in Virtual Environments. Oxford University Press, New York/Oxford (2011)Google Scholar
  21. Smith, M., Farnham, S., Drucker, S.: The social life of small graphical chat spaces. In: Schroeder, R. (ed.) The Social Life of Avatars: Presence and Interaction in Shared Virtual Environments, pp. 205–220. Springer, London (2002)Google Scholar
  22. Spence, J.: Demographics of virtual worlds. J. Virtual Worlds Res. 1(2) (2008).
  23. Steinkuehler, C., Williams, D.: Where everybody knows your (screen) name: online games as ‘Third Places’. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 11(4) (2006).
  24. Steptoe, W., Steed, A., Rovira, A., Rae, J.: Lie tracking: social presence, truth and deception in avatar-mediated telecommunication. In: Proceedings of CHI 2010, Atlanta, Apr (2010)Google Scholar
  25. Turkle, S.: Life on the Screen. Simon & Schuster, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  26. Turner, J.: Face to Face: Toward a Sociological Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour. Stanford University Press, Stanford (2002)Google Scholar
  27. Van der Kleij, R., Paashuis, R.M., Schraagen, J.M.C.: On the passage of time: temporal differences in video-mediated and face-to-face interaction. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 62, 521–542 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Vasalou, A., Joinson, A., Bänziger, T., Goldie, P., Pitt, J.: Avatars in social media: balancing accuracy, playfulness and embodied messages. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 66(11), 801–811 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Vertegaal, R.: Look who’s talking to whom: mediating joint attention in multiparty communication and collaboration. Ph.D. Thesis, Cognitive Ergonomics Department, University of Twente (1998)Google Scholar
  30. Vinayagamoorthy, V.: User responses to virtual humans in immersive virtual environments. PhD. thesis, Department of Computer Science, University College London, London (2006)Google Scholar
  31. Wadley, G., Gibbs, M., Ducheneaut, N.: You can be too rich: mediated communication in a virtual world. In: Proceedings of OzChi 2009 (no page numbers), Melbourne (2009)Google Scholar
  32. Walther, J.: Computer-mediated communication: impersonal, interpersonal, and hypersonal interaction. Commun. Res. 23, 3–43 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Williams, D., Caplan, S., Xiong, L.: Can you hear me now? The impact of voice in an online gaming community. Hum. Commun. Res. 33, 427–449 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Oxford Internet InstituteUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations