Editor-in-Chief: Floyd E. Bloom Editor: Ellis Rubinstein Managing Editor: Monica M. Bradford Deputy Editors: Philip H. Abelson (Engineering and AppliedSciences); John I. Brauman (PhysicalSciences); Thomas R. Cech (Biological Sciences) Editorial Assistant Managing Editor: Dawn McCoy; Senior Edi- tors: Eleanore Butz, Gilbert J. Chin, R. Brooks Hanson, Pamela J. Hines, Barbara Jasny, KatrinaL. Kelner, Paula A. Kiberstis, Linda J. Miller, L. Bryan Ray, Phillip D. Szuromi, David F. Voss; Associate Editors: Beverly A. Purnell, Linda R. Rowan; Contributing Editors: Richard Peters, Robert Sikorski; Letters: Christine Gilbert, Edi- tor Steven S. Lapham, Associate Editor; Charlene King, Assistant; Book Reviews: Katherine Livingston, Editor; Jeffrey Hearn, Editorial Assistant; Editing: Cara Tate, Supervisoc ErikG. Morris, Senior Copy Editor; Jeffrey E. Cook, Harry Jach, Etta Kavanagh, Joshua Marcy, Chris- tine M. Pearce; Copy Desk: Ellen E. Murphy, Supenfi- sor; Joi S. Granger, Abigail Hollister, Janet Miller Rife, Beverly Shields; Editorial Support: Carolyn Kyle, Edito- rial Assistant Andrew Goldstein, Josh Lipicky, Diane Long, Patricia M. Moore, Ted Smith, Anita Wynn, Manu- scriptAssistants; Administrative Support: Sylvia Kihara, Brent Gendleman;Cornputer Specialist: Roman Frillarte
News News Editor: Colin Norman; Features Editor: Tim Appenzeller; Deputy News Editors: Betsy Carpenter, Elizabeth Culona (contributing editor), Jean Marx, Jeffrey Mervis; News & CornmenVResearch News Writers: David Ehrenstein (intern), Constance Holden, Jocelyn Kaiser, Richard A. Kerr, Andrew Lawler, Eliot Marshall, Elizabeth Pennisi, Robert F. Service, Gretchen Vogel; Bureaus: Berkeley, CA: Marcia Barinaga (contributing correspondent); San Diego, CA: Jon Cohen; Chicago, IL: James Glanz (contributing correspondent); Boston, MA: Wade Roush; Copy Editors: Linda B. Felaco, Anna K. Brinkmann; Contributing Correspondents: Barry A. Cipra, Ann Gibbons, Charles C. Mann, Anne Simon Moffat, Virginia Morell, Gary Taubes, Ingrid Wickelgren; AdrninistrativeSupport: Scherraine Mack, Fannie Groom
Production & Art Production: James Landry, Director; Wendy K. Shank, Manager; Lizabeth A. Harman, Assistant Managec Daniel T. Helgerman, Vicki J. Jorgensen, Cynthia M. Penny, Kameaka Williams, Associates; Art: Amy Decker Henry, Design Directoc C. Faber Smith, Art Directoc Elizabeth Carroll, Associate Art Director; Katharine Sutliff, Scientific lllustratoc Holly Bishop, Preston Morrighan, Graphics As- sociates; Patricia M. Riehn, Graphics Assistant; Leslie Blizard, PhotoResearcher;Technology Manager: Chris- topher J. Feldmeier
Science International: Europe Office Editorial: Richard B. Gallagher, Office Head and Se- nior Editor; Stella M. Hurtley, Julia Uppenbrink, Associ- ate Editors; Belinda Holden, Editorial Associate; News: Daniel Clery, Editor; Nigel Williams, Correspondent; Michael Balter (Paris), Patricia Kahn (Heidelberg), Contri- buting Correspondents; UK Editor, Science's Next Wave: John MacFarlane; Administrative Support: Janet Mumford, Elizabeth Eldered-Martos; Asia Of- fice: Japan News Bureau: Dennis Normile (contributing correspondent); China Representative: Hao Xin ScienceNOW: www.sciencenow.org Editors: Richard Stone, Erik Stokstad
Science's Next Wave: www.nextwave.org Editor: John Benditt; Associate Editors: Nicole Ruediger, Wendy Yee; Canada Editor: Charles Boulakia
Richard S. Nicholson Publisher
Beth Rosner Associate Publisher
Michael Spinella Mernbership/Circulation Direct01
EDITORIAL Communities: Virtual vs. Real
Research on virtual communities has been dominated by the question of whether online communities can be designed in ways that allow them to match the accomplishments of off- line communities. The answer, at least according to several leading students of virtual com- munities, is that human relations in com~uter-mediated communities cannot be as inti- mate, strong, and affect-laden as in social communities. Howard Rheingold concludes his book The Virtual Community with the words "(we) must pay for our access to each other by forever questioning the reality of our online culture."
Michael Dertouzos, in his new book, What Will Be , writes about "the forces of the cave." He notes that the primordial feelings of fear, love, and anger cannot be transmit- ted online, because the participant knows "intellectually, but more importantly, intu- itivelv. that he can turn off the machine" and avoid the i m ~ a c t of the forces. He adds , , that for this reason, while MIT is planning to provide virtual classrooms for its students, the students will also be required to come to the campus once in a while-to return to the cave, the real community.
But the question of whether virtual communities match real ones is slanted: Virtual communities must somehow live up to the accomplishments of real ones. Those psychologi- cally inclined might suggest that this one-sided approach reflects an unconscious aim to reassure us that the new Frankenstein we have created will not outsmart us and dominate our real communities. As the recent brouhaha over Deep Blue's chess victory over Gary Kasparov indicates, the computer is still viewed with apprehension by some.
A different view emerges when we recast the question: What virtues of online com- munities are absent in off-line ones? Computer-mediated and face-to-face communities each have their own advantages as well as their own weaknesses. We should investigate what real communities can do that virtual communities cannot do, and vice versa.
Even with current technical limitations, online communities have several advan- tages. They let people bond without being in close proximity either spatially or temporally (unlike phone conversations, online communication can be asynchronous). Communities can evolve across national borders and time zones. They can encompass individuals who are homebound because of illness, age, or handicap. They are safer-a major consideration in many cities. Online discussion groups or forums can accommodate many more individuals than off-line meeting rooms can accommodate. And online communities have much stron-
ger memories than off-line communities in matters ranging from the resolutions passed many town meetings ago to names of the founders of the community. Finally, people can explore new relationships or even new identities online-they are not constrained by their physical appearance or off-line identity, as Sherry Turkle of MIT has documented. An em- bodiment of these features of online communities is the WELL (Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link). With its carefully crafted community guidelines, the WELL boasts a large member- ship and numerous discussion groups on topics ranging from "Women and Men" to "Science and Technology."
Real communities are better than virtual communities (at least as currentlv designed) u ,
in communicating affect, identifying participants and holding them accountable, and in providing group feedback (for example, cheering a speaker at a "real" town meeting). Which combinations of virtual and real communities are able to overcome the weaknesses of each and combine many of the strengths of both? Several studies show the advantage of mixed person-machine systems over pure interpersonal or computer-mediated systems. For auite a few vears, members of the AAAS have combined face-to-face communications at
annual and committee meetings with a rich diet of e-mail exchanges. In the future, such communities, whose members have close in-person relations and are all "wired" together as well, may benefit from a high volume of asynchronous communication and strong memory (features of online communities) and also from the accountability and communication of affect allowed by off-line communities.
Amitai Etzioni and Oren Etzioni
Arnitai Etzioni is director of The George Washington University Institute for Comrnunitaran Policy Studies. Oren Etzioni is an associate professor of computer science at the University of Washington.
www.sciencemag.org SCIENCE VOL. 277 18JULY 1997 295