Social Media Context Collapse: The Consequential Differences Between Context Collusion Versus Context Collision

Abstract

Context collapse blurs the boundaries between public, private, and professional selves and has emerged as an important research focus in relation to vocational identity. However, the conditions under which context collapse occur have been empirically neglected in the literature. Utilizing Davis and Jurgenson’s theoretical framework of context collapse (i.e., context collusion and context collision) and Erving Goffman’s theory of face-work, this study seeks to determine the consequential outcomes associated with the different context collapse conditions in two phases (Quasi-experimental in Phase 1 and open-ended questions in Phase 2). Specifically, a quasi-experimental study with scenarios was used to examine whether intentionality within context collusion and context collision influenced participants’ perception of loss of face and affect. First-year tertiary students (N = 151) who were also working were randomly selected from a capital state university student population and asked to respond to hypothetical online context collapse scenarios. Multivariate analysis of variance was conducted and the results indicated that context collapse has significant impact on participants’ loss of face and affect (emotion). In addition, a follow-up analysis of variance reveals partial support for the significant impact of context collapse on loss of face and affect.