Comments on: How Important are Avatars?

By: Josh

Josh — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 16:02:01 +0000

@Joan – great question! I use Bokardo b/c I have used it for so long…many people know me by it. I have considered moving away from it to my real name, and I probably will do so over time.

In general, I would stick to you personal name where possible…

By: Joan Vermette

Joan Vermette — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 15:13:21 +0000

So, with regard to the TrueName argument, Josh — why do you use “Bokardo” everywhere?

I use “jayeffvee” – read it aloud, and it’s my initials: my full name is Joan Frances Vermette. In fact, “jayeffvee” has been my nickname with a certain inner crowd since the 80s. I use it with a consistent cartoon avatar, and wonder if both name and cartoon hinder me from a findability and a trust perspective.

I’m just starting a consulting business, and am trying to decide what to call it, so this is a timely discussion for me. Any insights?

By: Ricky Onsman

Ricky Onsman — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:40:21 +0000

I agree with that, @Josh.

It would be interesting to measure people’s response to avatars that were attractive/not, with eye contact/without, tightly cropped/more space around face, photos/graphics etc.

I had one site where I was using animal photos as page banners. The theme was humane education, and the site went down really well. It took someone else to point out to me that all the photos I used had animals looking at the camera, tapping into that “through-the-camera-lens” eye contact dynamic, challenging the humans to look the animals in the eye.

Powerful stuff, this.

By: Josh

Josh — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:21:27 +0000

@Ricky Yes, you’re right. You can never trust anybody 100% online. Nor can we offline…for that matter. The salient point is that people find realistic avatars more trustful, perhaps in the way they find eye contact trustful. This does not equate to trustworthiness, but is a positive signal in that direction.

By: Ricky Onsman

Ricky Onsman — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 08:40:25 +0000

I think @Quivo’s point remains valid, though.

Yes, photos of real-looking people do seem more trustworthy, but that doesn’t mean they can actually be trusted.

When the email telling me someone has started following me on Twitter shows an avatar of a particularly gorgeous young blonde woman, my first thought is along the lines of “woo-hoo”, followed closely by “hang on”. It’s never genuine.

The Twitter spammers use the photo/avatar principle to their unprincipled advantage.

By: AndrewM

AndrewM — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:27:24 +0000

This seems to be a bit about self branding. Whether we like it on not we are judged by first appearances and now these encounters seem to take place more online than in person. If your image is not a likeness of yourself I think there is less credibility, on the surface, at first glance. Over time you can build trust but a first impressions could be the only time you have. I’ve seen some strange avatars. A consistent avatar image across sites makes sense and a photo makes more sense in a business context.

By: Josh

Josh — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 12:23:59 +0000

@Quivo...you're right it is a bit of a TrueName argument...I happen to believe the argument! Did you know that people find real names and real pictures more trustful? Here is one such study: The Influence of the Avatar on Online Perceptions of Anthropomorphism, Androgyny, Credibility, Homophily, and Attraction.

By: Quivo

Quivo — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 01:32:30 +0000

This post strikes me as another version of the TrueName argument, where people insist that using your real name instead of a pseudonym means you are automatically more trustworthy and ‘real’ than all the other pseudonymous folks. Likewise, the argument of this post falls apart when you think of how easily you could fake a ‘real’ photo and swap it in as your avatar. Without meeting you in person, how would anyone ever know that you didn’t look like the person in your avatar?

This is not to say that people don’t have preferences for the way they present themselves online, or that preferring to use a ‘real’ photo of yourself as your avatar isn’t as valid as any other choice. It just strikes me as really naive to think that trust maps directly to thin, easily faked indicators that someone is a real person, e.g. an avatar that looks like it is a photo of them; an alias that looks like it could be their real name. As with people in general, what the person does and says is more important than how they present themselves in the long run.

By: David Thomas Garcia

David Thomas Garcia — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 22:00:15 +0000

I like the new blog design, very clean with no distractions. Big thumbs up. The font doesn’t feel too big with all that white space to swim in.

If the presence of an avatar creates trust in a social context, it would probably help when building trust in marketing or support environments too. I’m thinking of live chat services where you can see an avatar of the person or even email marketing where you can see the avatar of the salesperson.

By: Chris Allison

Chris Allison — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 20:46:07 +0000

really interesting post Josh. The concept you refer to near the end is similar [if not exactly the same] to the psychological concept of social interference and social facilitation. Avatars serve as social facilitation; however, as you quoted the internet serves up all sorts of social interference in the form all the junk people decide to do in under the mask of anonymity. A personal avatar can be the opposite of anonymity which helps build trust because it creates a degree of responsibility.