Building communities of practice with social media

Since the early 2000s, computer-mediated communication (CMC) has grown rapidly, playing a crucial role in self-development. A key distinction between CMC and real-life interactions is the lack of a physically present partner. This absence makes non-verbal cues such as facial expressions, body language, and paralinguistic signals unavailable in CMC platforms like email, instant messaging, or social media. The lack of these cues can create ambiguity and complicate how feedback is interpreted.The...

We have discussed why we form relationships, what attracts us to others, and different types of love. But what determines whether we are satisfied with and stay in a relationship? One theory that provides an explanation is social exchange theory. According to social exchange theory, we act as naïve economists in keeping a tally of the ratio of costs and benefits of forming and maintaining a relationship with others (Rusbult & Van Lange, 2003).

Not all intergroup interactions lead to negative outcomes. Sometimes, being in a group situation can improve performance. Social facilitation occurs when an individual performs better when an audience is watching than when the individual performs the behavior alone. This typically occurs when people are performing a task for which they are skilled.

Social proof is a form of persuasion based on comparison and conformity. People compare their behavior and actions to what others are doing and will change to conform to do what their peers do.

Community-based interventions in mental health represent a paradigm shift from institution-centered care to treatments embedded within the fabric of local communities. By prioritizing inclusion and leveraging existing societal structures, this approach fosters a supportive environment conducive to addressing mental health challenges while promoting individual dignity and agency.
Foundations of Community Mental Health Programs
Central to the success of community-based interventions is the...

Group polarization is the strengthening of an original group attitude following the discussion of views within a group (Teger & Pruitt, 1967). That is, if a group initially favors a viewpoint, after discussion the group consensus is likely a stronger endorsement of the viewpoint. Conversely, if the group was initially opposed to a viewpoint, group discussion would likely lead to stronger opposition.