Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Facebook and psychology: What we know so far
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Facebook and psychology: What we know so far

13,060

Published on

Dr Ciarán Mc Mahon (Dublin Business School) reviews the psychological research about Facebook to date, as part of the Dún Laoghaire Institute of Art, Design and Technology's Department of Learning …

Dr Ciarán Mc Mahon (Dublin Business School) reviews the psychological research about Facebook to date, as part of the Dún Laoghaire Institute of Art, Design and Technology's Department of Learning Sciences Seminar Series (October 28th, 2010).

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
13,060
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
203
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Dr Ciarán McMahon, Dublin BusinessSchool Departmentof LearningSciences Seminar Series, DúnLaoghaireInstitueof Art,Desgin & Technology, October 28th, 2010.
  • 2. Statistics (Facebook.com,2010) • More than 500 million active users • 50%of active users log on daily • over 700 billion minutes spent per month • over 900million objects (pages, groups, events etc.) • Average user • has 130 friends • is connected to 80 community pages, groups andevents • creates 90 pieces of contenteach month • More than 70 translations available • 70%of Facebook users are outside the United States
  • 3. Academic study • 66 peer-reviewed papers thus far have dealt with Facebook as their main topic • In 2007, 3 papers • In 2008, 16 papers • In 2009, 26 papers • Thus far in 2010, 18 papers – Analysis excludes book chapters, conference papers etc.
  • 4. Academic study • unsurprisingly, Facebookhas been discussedmostin cyberpsychological/computer-mediatedcommunicationoriented journals – 8papersintheJournalofComputer-MediatedCommunication – 7papersinComputersinHumanBehavior – and7papersinCyberpsychology,Behavior&SocialNetworking
  • 5. Academic study • but also papers in: – JournalofExperimentalSocialPsychology – JournalofMediaPsychology – JournalofMedicalEthics – PsychologicalScience – JournalofCommunity Psychology – JournalofApplied Developmental Psychology
  • 6. Academic study – wide variety of topics – several different methodological approaches – a number of research programmes have been developed • average2.8 authors perpaper – no major debates, yet
  • 7. Authors (via wordle.net)
  • 8. Notable programmes • Michigan State, Dept. of Communication, – Joseph Walther, Brandon Van Der Heide, Nicole Ellison • Harvard, Dept. of Sociology – Kevin Lewis, Jason Kaufman • University of Windsor, Dept. of Psychology, – Jaime Arseneault, Emily Orr, R. Robert Orr,
  • 9. Notable omissions • no danah boyd • no BJ Fogg • no peer-reviewed papers on Facebook in either case
  • 10. Article titles (via wordle.net)
  • 11. Population
  • 12. Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe (2007) • one of the earliest published articles (earlier presentations) • “Facebook Usage Intensity Questionnaire” later used by many others • 268 undergrads (66% female, 44% male) • overwhelmingly used Facebook – tokeep in touchwithold friends – tomaintainor intensifyrelationshipscharacterizedbysomeformof offlineconnection Ellison, N.B.,Steinfield,C.,&Lampe,C.(2007).Thebenefitsoffacebook"friends:"socialcapitalandcollegestudents'useofonlinesocial networksites.JournalofComputer-MediatedCommunication,12(4),1143-1168.
  • 13. Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe (2007) • strong association between use of Facebook and bridging, not Facebook and bridging, not bonding, social capital Ellison, N.B.,Steinfield,C.,&Lampe,C.(2007).Thebenefitsoffacebook"friends:"socialcapitalandcollegestudents'useofonlinesocial networksites.JournalofComputer-MediatedCommunication,12(4),1143-1168.
  • 14. Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe (2007) • usage was foundtointeract with self-esteem Ellison, N.B.,Steinfield,C.,&Lampe,C.(2007).Thebenefitsoffacebook"friends:"socialcapitalandcollegestudents'useofonlinesocial networksites.JournalofComputer-MediatedCommunication,12(4),1143-1168.
  • 15. Hargittai (2007) • Are there differences between people who: – use social network sites and those who stay away, despite a familiarity with them? – use different social network sites? – Facebook, MySpace, Xanga, and Friendster • 1060 first year undergrads, 18/19 y.o. (56% f, 44%f) Hargittai, E. (2007). Whose space? differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 276-297.
  • 16. Hargittai (2007) • 1060 first year undergrads, 18/19 y.o. (56% f, 44%f) – Hispanic s more likely to use MySpace than are Whites – Asian and Asian Americans less likely to use MySpace – Asian Americans more likely to use Xanga and Friendster than Whites – students whose parents have lower levels of schooling more likely to use MySpace – whereas students whose parents have higher levels of education are more likely to be Facebook users. Hargittai, E. (2007). Whose space? differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 276-297.
  • 17. Gangadharbatla (2009) ‘Facebook me’ • reasons for joining and participation • 237 undergrads (44% male, 56% female) • positive influences on attitudes toward SNS from – Internetself-efficacy, – need tobelong, – andcollective self-esteem • no rolefor need forcognition Gangadharbatla,H.(2008). Facebookme:Collectiveself-esteem,needtobelong,and internetself-efficacyaspredictorsofthe iGeneration'sattitudestowardsocialnetworkingsites.JournalofInteractiveAdvertising,8(2), 5-15.
  • 18. Fogel & Nehmad (2009) ‘risk taking, trust,and privacy’ • Myspace and Facebook • face-to-face survey (collected 2007) • 205 undergrads (103 male, 102 female!) • SNS users hadsignificantly greaterrisk taking – men hadsignificantlygreaterrisktakingscores thanwomen. – women hadsignificantlygreater scoresthanmen forprivacyconcerns • but there wereno genderdifferences for privacy behavior or privacy attitudes. Fogel,J.,&Nehmad,E.(2009).Internetsocialnetworkcommunities:Risktaking,trust,and privacyconcerns.ComputersinHuman Behavior,25(1),153-160.
  • 19. Population
  • 20. Grasmuck,Martin& Zhao(2009)–‘ethno-racialidentitydisplayson Facebook’ • contentanalysisof83Facebookprofiles • supplementedby63in-personinterviews(34m,29f) • AfricanAmericans,Latinos,andIndianancestrystudents – revealedmoreintensiveproductionofidentityconstruction • WhiteandVietnamesestudents – showed much less involvement Grasmuck,S., Martin,J., &Zhao,S.(2009).Ethno-racialidentitydisplaysonFacebook.JournalofComputer-MediatedCommunication, 15(1),158-188.
  • 21. Grasmuck, Martin& Zhao(2009) – ‘ethno-racial identitydisplays onFacebook’ • Quotations – – AfricanAmericans • infusedwithinspirationalquotationsaboutracialinjustice – Latino • religious andinspirationalquotes • untranslatedSpanishquotes – Indian • long entriesinvolving thoughtfulandhumorousthemes • ethnic prideoftensignaled throughGandhi – WhiteandVietnamese • almostnever selected quotesthatsignaled racialor even ethnic identification Grasmuck,S., Martin,J., &Zhao,S.(2009).Ethno-racialidentitydisplaysonFacebook.JournalofComputer-MediatedCommunication, 15(1),158-188.
  • 22. Judd & Kennedy(2010) Five-year study of campusinternet use • Australian five-year study (2005–2009) of biomedical students’ on-campus use of the Internet • Internet usage logs • Email primary method of electronic communication – steepdropin useduring2006and2007 • Corresponds with rise in Facebook usage – onlyminimal useofothersocial networkingsites Judd, T.,&Kennedy,G. (2010).A five-yearstudyofon-campusinternetuse byundergraduatebiomedicalstudents.Computers& Education,55(4),1564-1571.
  • 23. Your Profile
  • 24. Buffardi& Campbell(2008) • Does narcissism predict activity on Facebook? – 129subjects(100female?) – 128raterscodingwebpages(86 females,42 males) – scores onNarcissisticPersonalityInventory(NPI;Raskin& Terry,1988)comparedtoraters’ assessmentofparticipant’snarcissismonFacebookprofilepages Buffardi,L.E., &Campbell,W. K.(2008). Narcissismandsocialnetworkingwebsites.PersonalityandSocialPsychologyBulletin,34(10), 1303-1314.
  • 25. Buffardi& Campbell(2008) • Narcissism related to – higherlevels ofsocial activityin theonline community(sexierphotographs,moreself- promotingcontentetc) – correlationwith quantityoftextin ‘AboutMe’ lowerthanelsewhere Buffardi,L.E., &Campbell,W. K.(2008). Narcissismandsocialnetworkingwebsites.PersonalityandSocialPsychologyBulletin,34(10), 1303-1314.
  • 26. Mehdizadeh(2010)‘narcissism andself-esteem’ • 100 Facebook students (50 male,50 female) – undergraduateproject • Rosenberg self-esteem & Narcissism Personality Inventory (NPI)-16. • Facebook pages content analysed (single coder!)for ‘self-promotion’ Mehdizadeh,S. (2010).Self-presentation2.0:Narcissismand self-esteemonFacebook.CyberPsychology,BehaviorandSocial Networking,13(4),357-364.
  • 27. Mehdizadeh(2010)‘narcissism andself-esteem’ • Number of times Facebook checkedand time spent onFacebook – positively correlatedwith NPI-16 – negatively correlatedwithself-esteem – Males displayedmoreself-promotionalinformationin theAboutMeandNotes – women displayedmoreself-promotionalMain Photos. Mehdizadeh,S. (2010).Self-presentation2.0:Narcissismand self-esteemonFacebook.CyberPsychology,BehaviorandSocial Networking,13(4),357-364.
  • 28. Back etal. (2010) ‘Facebook profiles reflect actual personality’ • 236 (ages 17–22 years) from the United States (Facebook;N = 133, 52 male, 81 female) and Germany (StudiVZ, SchuelerVZ;N = 103, 17 male, 86 female). • self-reports & reports from 4 well-acquainted friends & ideal self-reports, and profile observer reports Back,M. D.,Stopfer,J. M.,Vazire,S.,Gaddis,S.,Schmukle,S.C.,Egloff,B.,&Gosling,S.D.(2010).Facebookprofilesreflectactual personality,notself-idealization.PsychologicalScience,21(3),372-374.
  • 29. Back etal. (2010) ‘Facebook profiles reflect actual personality’ • results were consistent with the extended real-life hypothesis – observers should be ableto accuratelyinfer thepersonality characteristics of profile owners. • neuroticism least accurate (difficult to ascertain in zero-acquaintance contexts) Back,M. D.,Stopfer,J. M.,Vazire,S.,Gaddis,S.,Schmukle,S.C.,Egloff,B.,&Gosling,S.D.(2010).Facebookprofilesreflectactual personality,notself-idealization.PsychologicalScience,21(3),372-374.
  • 30. Zhao, Grasmuck & Martin (2008) ‘Identity construction’ • 63 Facebook accounts (students) • coding scheme developed for content analysis • identities on Facebook compared to those in the nonymous offline environments or the anonymous online environments • claim their identities implicitly rather than explicitly • stress group and consumer identities over personally narrated ones Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1816-1836.
  • 31. Facebook is a nonymous online setting, where users are required to reveal their real names in a fixed institutional context, which explains why users tend not to treat it as a venue for expressing their ‘‘hidden selves” or marginalized or contested identities. Zhao, Grasmuck & Martin (2008, p. 1831) Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1816-1836.
  • 32. Ross, Orr,Sisic, Arseneault,Simmering, & Orr(2009) • university’s psychology participation pool • 97 Ss (15 men 82 women) • NEO-IP vs self-reports of Facebookuse – high Extraversiongroupreportedmembership in significantlymoregroups – high on thetraitof NeuroticismreportedthattheWall wastheirfavouriteFacebook component, – low onNeuroticismpreferredphotos – higher levels ofOpennesstoExperiencewereassociatedwithagreatertendencytobe sociable throughFacebook. • “relatively few significant findings in relation to the personality variables” (p. 582) Ross,C.,Orr,E.S.,Sisic,M.,Arseneault,J.M.,Simmering,M. G.,&Orr,R.R.(2009).Personalityandmotivationsassociatedwithfacebook use.ComputersinHumanBehavior,25(2),578-586
  • 33. Amichai-Hamburger & Vinitzky (2010) • based on Ross etal. (2009); similar hypotheses • method from Zhao etal. (2008) • coding ofuser profiles & NEO-PI-R • 237 students (101 male, 136 female) • stronger support of Ross et al’s (2009) hypotheses Amichai-Hamburger,Y., &Vinitzky,G.(2010).Socialnetworkuse andpersonality.ComputersinHumanBehavior,26(6),1289-1295.
  • 34. Amichai-Hamburger & Vinitzky (2010) • extroversion and conscientiousness – relatedtonumberoffriends • introverts – morepersonalinformationontheir profiles • high neurotic – morelikely topostpicturesofthemselves – less likelyto postotherpictures • openness linked to more expressiveness on profile Amichai-Hamburger,Y., &Vinitzky,G.(2010).Socialnetworkuse andpersonality.ComputersinHumanBehavior,26(6),1289-1295.
  • 35. Kluemper & Rosen(2009) ‘employment selection methods’ • 63 students in an employment selection course (49% m, 51%f) • After a 1 hour training session • raters accurately distinguished between individuals on – fourofthebig-five personalitytraits, – intelligence, – andperformance. • Hence,itisveryeasytoseeifsomeoneisemployablefromtheirprofile Kluemper,D.H.,&Rosen,P.A.(2009).Futureemploymentselectionmethods:Evaluatingsocialnetworkingwebsites.Journalof ManagerialPsychology,24(6),567-580..
  • 36. Your Friends
  • 37. Lewis & West (2009) ‘friending’ • qualitative 16 Ss (7m,9f) – semi-structuredinterviews – Londonundergrads – whyandhowtheyjoinedandusedFacebook • all joined through peergroup • all mentioned initial excitement – lookingatprofiles, – andaddingfriends – being addedas afriend, • none admitted to competing to ‘collect’ friends Lewis,J., &West,A. (2009).‘Friending’:London-basedundergraduates’experienceoffacebook.NewMedia&Society,11(7),1209-1229
  • 38. Lewis & West (2009) ‘friending’ • all the respondents reported checking profiles, also known as ‘stalking’... Stalking has little to do with building social relationships, but two respondents called it ‘addictive’. For example, three female respondents reported that either they or their friends followed what ex-boyfriends were doing by checking their profiles. For five respondents this appeared to account for a majority of the time spent on Facebook. (Lewis & West, 2009, p. 1215) Lewis,J., &West,A. (2009).‘Friending’:London-basedundergraduates’experienceoffacebook.NewMedia&Society,11(7),1209-1229
  • 39. Lewis & West (2009) ‘friending’ A male respondent told the story of a female student he had been ‘fond of’, but had not seen for many months after she left the university, even though she continued to live in London and they continued to communicate via Facebook. When he bumped into her one day on the street, he found that they had little to say – there was nocatching up to do. Lewis & West (2009, p.1216-1217) Lewis,J., &West,A. (2009).‘Friending’:London-basedundergraduates’experienceoffacebook.NewMedia&Society,11(7),1209-1229
  • 40. Lewis & West (2009) ‘friending’ Two female respondents reported that initially they had tried to fill in all the personal information boxes on their profiles, but had decided to opt for a more minimalist approach because they disliked the impression that it conveyed: ‘I tried once, re-read it and thought, “Fuck no!”’ (Hannah); this respondent added that heraim was to contact friends rather than to publicize herself. Lewis & West (2009, p.1222) Lewis,J., &West,A. (2009).‘Friending’:London-basedundergraduates’experienceoffacebook.NewMedia&Society,11(7),1209-1229
  • 41. Adding Friends
  • 42. Cohen(2008, p.10) –‘political economy of Facebook’ On Facebook, almost all member activity can be conceived of as immaterial labour that benefits the company. A major task upon which Facebook is based is “adding” friends, which is the act of linking to other people’s profiles and forms the basic design of the site. The work of adding friends is also Facebook’s main growth strategy. Cohen,N.(2008).Thevalorizationofsurveillance:Towardsa politicaleconomyofFacebook.DemocraticCommuniqué,22(1), 5-22.
  • 43. Walther, van der Heide, Hamel, & Shulman (2009) –‘warranting theory’ • Which is more important – what you say about yourself, or what others say about you? – warrantingprinciple predictsthatusersattachgreatercredencetoinformationthatisimmune toinformationthatis immunetoa target’smanipulationcomparedtotargets’self-descriptions comparedtotargets’self-descriptions • mocked upprofiles to manipulate extraversion (study 1) andattractiveness (study 2) Walther,J.B., Van DerHeide,B., Hamel,L.M.,& Shulman,H.C.(2009).Self-generatedversusother-generatedstatementsandimpressionsin computer-mediatedcommunication:A testofwarrantingtheoryusingfacebook. CommunicationResearch,36(2), 229-253.
  • 44. Walther, van der Heide, Hamel, & Shulman (2009) –‘warranting theory’ • Attractivestatementsincluded – “Haven’t seen yousince thatgreatpartylastweekend...myfriends fromhome thought friends fromhome thoughtyouwere hottt!,” – “Hey gorgeous(or“Hey mister”), youlookedgr8lastnight,yourebringingsexy back” yourebringingsexy back”[sic]. Walther,J.B., Van DerHeide,B., Hamel,L.M.,& Shulman,H.C.(2009).Self-generatedversusother-generatedstatementsandimpressionsin computer-mediatedcommunication:A testofwarrantingtheoryusingfacebook. CommunicationResearch,36(2), 229-253.
  • 45. Walther, van der Heide, Hamel, & Shulman (2009) –‘warranting theory’ • Unattractive statements included – “dontpayattentionto thosejerksatthe barlastnight, whatmattersis onthe inside!” – “Im sosorrythings didntworkoutwiththatblind dateyouwenton, whoknewshe(or“he”) wouldturnouttobeso shallow”[sic]. Walther,J.B., Van DerHeide,B., Hamel,L.M.,& Shulman,H.C.(2009).Self-generatedversusother-generatedstatementsandimpressionsin computer-mediatedcommunication:A testofwarrantingtheoryusingfacebook. CommunicationResearch,36(2), 229-253.
  • 46. Walther, van der Heide, Hamel, & Shulman (2009) –‘warranting theory’ • some support in the extraversion condition, much stronger support in the attractiveness condition • post-hoc analysis revealedthat the profile was deemedto be – less honestwhenhe orsheclaimed tobeattractive(with friendsagreeing, ordisagreeing) – morehonestclaimed tobeunattractive(with friendsagreeing, or friendsdisagreeing) Walther,J.B., Van DerHeide,B., Hamel,L.M.,& Shulman,H.C.(2009).Self-generatedversusother-generatedstatementsandimpressionsin computer-mediatedcommunication:A testofwarrantingtheoryusingfacebook. CommunicationResearch,36(2), 229-253.
  • 47. ...itappears that one’s ownclaims of attractiveness aresuspect on Facebook.In suspect onFacebook. In terms of attractiveness judgments, onthe other hand, judgments, on the other hand, one’s friends’ comments carry the weight. Walther,J.B., Van DerHeide,B., Hamel,L.M.,& Shulman,H.C.(2009).Self-generatedversusother-generatedstatementsandimpressionsin computer-mediatedcommunication:A testofwarrantingtheoryusingfacebook. CommunicationResearch,36(2), 229-253.
  • 48. Walther, Van der Heide, Kim, Westerman and Tong (2008) – ‘the company we keep’ • Unsurprisingly, physical attractiveness of profile owner’s friends affects the evaluation of the profile owner. – also,postingsof friendsaffecttheevaluationof theprofileowners. – statements had a significant impact on ratings of the social attraction and credibility of the profileowner. Walther,J.B.,Van DerHeide,B.,Kim,S.,Westerman,D.,&Tong,S.T.(2008).Theroleoffriends'appearanceandbehavioron evaluationsof individualson facebook:Areweknownbythecompanywekeep?HumanCommunicationResearch,34(1),28-49.
  • 49. Walther, Van der Heide, Kim, Westerman and Tong (2008) – ‘the company we keep’ • however, there was an unexpected gender interaction with regard to negative statements – sexualinnuendo,excessive drinking • increaseddesirability of the male • decreaseddesirability of the female – sexual doublestandardsalive andwell ontheinternet! Walther,J.B.,Van DerHeide,B.,Kim,S.,Westerman,D.,&Tong,S.T.(2008).Theroleoffriends'appearanceandbehavioron evaluations of individualson facebook:Areweknownbythecompanywekeep?HumanCommunicationResearch,34(1), 28-49.
  • 50. Wang, Moon,Kwon, Evans, & Stefanone (2010) – ‘face off’ • what affects willingness to acceptfriendship? • comparedattractive, unattractive and no-photo conditions • both male and females were more willing to initiate friendships with opposite- friendships with opposite-sex profile owners with attractive photos (surprise!) attractive photos (surprise!) • but, relatively more willing to make friends with without a photo than an aphotothan anunattractive photo Wang,S.S.,Moon, S.,Kwon, K. H.,Evans, C.A.,&Stefanone,M.A. (2010).Faceoff:Implicationsofvisualcuesoninitiatingfriendshipon facebook.ComputersinHumanBehavior,26(2), 226-234..
  • 51. Tong, Van der Heide, Langwell & Walther (2008) – ‘too much of a good thing’ • how many friends is best? • experimented with 102, 302, 502, 702, and 902 ‘friends’ • found a curvilinear relationship between number of friends and an individual’s social attractiveness – peaks at about 300 friends • however, no relationship found between number of friends and physical attractiveness .
  • 52. Your Posts
  • 53. .
  • 54. Peluchette & Karl (2010) –‘what were theythinking?’ • reasoning behind posting behaviour • very much tied to image useris trying to portray • Males – weremorelikely tosaytheirprofile portrayedasexuallyappealingimage appealingimage – alsomorelikely topost‘problematic’content Peluchette,J., &Karl,K. (2010).Examining students'intendedimageon facebook:"whatweretheythinking?!". JournalofEducationfor Business,85(1),30-37..
  • 55. Peluchette & Karl (2010) –‘what were theythinking?’ • those whofelt they portrayed – a hard-working image wereleast likely to post‘problematic’ content – a fun orintelligent image not relatedto posting of ‘problematic’ content – a sexually appealing, wild, or offensive image weremostlikely to post inappropriate content Peluchette,J., &Karl,K. (2010).Examining students'intendedimageon facebook:"whatweretheythinking?!". JournalofEducationfor Business,85(1),30-37..
  • 56. Karl, Peluchette, & Schlaegel(2010) ‘Facebook Faux Pas’ • US and German sample • those high on – conscientiousness, – agreeableness, – andemotionalstability – significantlyless likely to post problematiccontent • high on Compulsive Internet Usewere more likely to post Facebook faux pas • US students in general weremore inclined to postproblematic content Karl,K., Peluchette,J., &Schlaegel,C.(2010).Who's postingfacebookfauxpas?A cross-culturalexaminationofpersonalitydifferences. InternationalJournalofSelectionandAssessment,18(2),174-186.
  • 57. Your Privacy
  • 58. Lewis, Kaufman, & Christakis(2008) ‘taste for privacy’ • large dataset 1709 profiles of university students • factors that are predictiveof a student having a private versus public profile – morelikely tohaveaprivateprofileif theirfriendsandroommateshavethem; – women aremorelikely tohaveprivateprofilesthanaremen; – privateprofile isassociatedwitha higherlevel ofonline activity Lewis,K.,Kaufman,J., &Christakis,N.(2008).The tasteforprivacy:Ananalysisofcollegestudentprivacysettingsin anonlinesocial network.JournalofComputer-MediatedCommunication,14(1),79-100.
  • 59. Lewis, Kaufman, & Christakis(2008) ‘taste for privacy’ - private profiles associated with certain ‘cultural preferences’: - moretastein ‘popularmusic’ - less frequenttastein classical music Lewis,K.,Kaufman,J., &Christakis,N.(2008).The tasteforprivacy:Ananalysisofcollegestudentprivacysettingsin anonlinesocial network.JournalofComputer-MediatedCommunication,14(1),79-100.
  • 60. Lewis, Kaufman, & Christakis(2008, p. 94) While we have documented a number of discrete tastes associated with privacy associated with privacy and sets of tastes associated with publicity, the particular with publicity, the particular content of these cultural profiles is not always easy profiles is not always easy to interpret. What does Tchaikovsky, for instance, Tchaikovsky, for instance, have in common with Joseph Heller or Bridget Jones Heller or Bridget Jones with Ray Charles? Moreover, why are the former why are the former associated with public profiles and the latter with private the latter with private ones? Lewis,K.,Kaufman,J., &Christakis,N.(2008).The tasteforprivacy:Ananalysisofcollegestudentprivacysettingsin anonlinesocial network.JournalofComputer-MediatedCommunication,14(1),79-100.
  • 61. Lewis, Kaufman, & Christakis(2008, p.94) Consequently, students with these tastes may want them to be especially visible.... In other words, if the content of what is displayed is entwined with the propensity to display itself, online privacy is not just about those who keep Goffman’s stage curtain tightly drawn. It is also about those who throw it wide open—where a performance tells as much about the performer as about what she wants the audience to see. Lewis,K.,Kaufman,J., &Christakis,N.(2008).The tasteforprivacy:Ananalysisofcollegestudentprivacysettingsin anonlinesocial network.JournalofComputer-MediatedCommunication,14(1),79-100.
  • 62. Debatin, Lovejoy, Horn & Hughes(2009) ‘attitudes and behaviours’ • 119 undergrads (68%female), survey, also interview • Users claimed to understand privacy issues, yet reported uploading large amounts of personal information. • Risks to privacy were ascribed more to others than to the self • Facebook engrained in daily life, benefits outweigh risks • One interviewee had account hacked several times, deleted profile twice, and still came back.. Debatin,B.,Lovejoy,J.P.,Horn,A.,&Hughes,B.N.(2009).Facebookandonline privacy:Attitudes,behaviors,andunintended consequences.JournalofComputer-MediatedCommunication,15(1),83-108.
  • 63. Debatin, Lovejoy, Horn & Hughes(2009, p. 99) Yet six months later, his profile was attacked again, this time with a shot at his girlfriend. The shot at his girlfriend. The hackers used the same manipulated profile picture, but added the profile picture, but added the character Donkey from the movie Shrek and tagged Donkey as Shrek and tagged Donkey as Brian’s girlfriend. Brian deleted the profile again, and set up another profile again, and set up another profile with a nonschool e-mail and strict privacy settings. The and strict privacy settings. The whole incident left him guessing who did it and why. He also said who did it and why. He also said that he was very upset about the incident, particularly because incident, particularly because his girlfriend became the target too. It is remarkable that Brian isremarkablethatBrianstayedwithFacebookandkeptcoming backtoit againandagain. Debatin,B.,Lovejoy,J.P.,Horn,A.,&Hughes,B.N.(2009).Facebook andonlineprivacy:Attitudes,behaviors,andunintended consequences.JournalofComputer-MediatedCommunication,15(1),83-108.
  • 64. Debatin, Lovejoy, Horn & Hughes(2009, p. 103) Most users do not seem to realize that restricting access to their data does not sufficiently address data does not sufficiently address the risks resulting from the amount, quality and persistence of amount, quality and persistence of the data they provide. After all, restricting profile visibility to restricting profile visibility to ‘‘friends only’’ simply means restricting it within the visible part of it within the visible part of the iceberg. As long as users feed the invisible part of the iceberg with invisible part of the iceberg with extensive personal data that they update voluntarily and update voluntarilyandcontinually,theirprivacyisatrisk. Debatin,B.,Lovejoy,J.P.,Horn,A.,&Hughes,B.N.(2009).Facebook andonlineprivacy:Attitudes,behaviors,andunintended consequences.JournalofComputer-MediatedCommunication,15(1),83-108.
  • 65. From Debatin, Lovejoy, Horn &Hughes (2009, p.88)
  • 66. Christofides, Muise, & Desmarais (2009) ‘disclosure and control’ • 343(81 men, 261females) undergraduates • privacy,disclosure,control • participantsperceived thattheydisclosedmoreinformationaboutthemselves on Facebookthanin general, – butalsothatinformationcontrolandprivacywereimportanttothem • informationdisclosure andinformationcontrol were not significantlynegativelycorrelated, • disclosure wassignificantlypredictedbytheneed forpopularity • levels oftrustandself-esteem predicted informationcontrol Christofides,E., Muise, A.,&Desmarais,S.(2009).Informationdisclosureandcontrolon Facebook:Aretheytwosidesofthe samecoin or twodifferentprocesses? CyberPsychology&Behavior,12(3),341-345.
  • 67. Christofides, Muise, & Desmarais (2009, p. 343) ...these findings suggestthat there is something different about the ways in which different about the ways in which people act when interacting in the Facebook environment as compared to othermeans of communication. Perhaps it is because Facebook creates norms regarding what specific information information to disclose based on what others have disclosed. It is an environment where information is shared proactively and in response toothers. Christofides,E., Muise, A.,&Desmarais,S.(2009).Informationdisclosureandcontrolon Facebook:Aretheytwosidesofthe samecoin or twodifferentprocesses? CyberPsychology&Behavior,12(3),341-345.
  • 68. The News Feed
  • 69. Hoadley, Xu,Lee & Rosson(2010) –News Feed ...no new information is revealed; people areable to seechanges if they choose seechanges if they choose to visit their friends’ Facebook pages. News Feed did not changerestrictions on accessto information. Hoadley, Xu, Lee & Rosson (2010, p. 52) Hoadley,C.M.,Xu, H.,Lee, J.J.&Rosson,M. B.(2010). Privacyasinformationaccessandillusorycontrol:ThecaseoftheFacebookNews Feedprivacyoutcry.ElectronicCommerceResearchandApplications,9(1),50-60.
  • 70. Hoadley, Xu,Lee & Rosson(2010) –News Feed • majority (68%) had at least some degreeof negativity • 29% of respondents felt ‘‘very negative” • though the newinterface provides easier information access,it was widely access,it was widely perceivedto provideless privacy. • even though this was not the case –why? Hoadley,C.M.,Xu, H.,Lee, J.J.&Rosson,M. B.(2010). Privacyasinformationaccessandillusorycontrol:ThecaseoftheFacebookNews Feedprivacyoutcry.ElectronicCommerceResearchandApplications,9(1),50-60.
  • 71. Hoadley, Xu,Lee & Rosson(2010) –News Feed • found that those whochanged their privacy settings afterwards wereactually those who found the changemost negative • these users were also more likely to have morefriends Hoadley,C.M.,Xu, H.,Lee, J.J.&Rosson,M. B.(2010). Privacyasinformationaccessandillusorycontrol:ThecaseoftheFacebookNews Feedprivacyoutcry.ElectronicCommerceResearchandApplications,9(1),50-60.
  • 72. It seems reasonable to argue that Facebook users’ privacy-related behaviors ... are more likely to be influenced by their concerns over the amount of information being accessed ..., instead of concerns over being released... This point bears repeating: users seem to be much more concerned about what personal information is likely to be accessedthan what personal information it is possibleto access. Hoadley,Xu, Lee&Rosson(2010,p.58) Hoadley,C.M.,Xu, H.,Lee, J.J.&Rosson,M. B.(2010). Privacyasinformationaccessandillusorycontrol:ThecaseoftheFacebookNews Feedprivacyoutcry.ElectronicCommerceResearchandApplications,9(1),50-60.
  • 73. Rather than blocking dissent, Facebook transforms resistance into productivity... The site incorporates users’ knowledge into its development, which retains members (perhaps instilling them with a sense of ownership in the site, or at least a sense of the importance of one’s voice) and affirms the critical importance of an active membership. Cohen (2008, pp. 12-13) Cohen, N. (2008). The valorization of surveillance: Towards a political economy of Facebook. Democratic Communiqué, 22(1), 5-22.
  • 74. Grimmelman (2009, p. 120) Users want and need to socialize, and they act in privacy-risking ways because of privacy-risking ways because of it. We cannot and should not beat these social should not beat these social urges out of people; we cannot and should not stop cannot and should not stop people from acting on them. We can and should help We can and should help them understand the consequences of their socializing, consequences of their socializing, make available safer ways to do it, and protect ways to do it, and protect them from sociality hijackers. Grimmelman,J. (2009).SavingFacebook.IowaLawReview,94,1139-1205.
  • 75. Disclosure
  • 76. Health sciences
  • 77. Concernsfrom medicine Even with cautious privacy settings, physicians should not assume they can use online forums for social purposes only, as unforeseen breaches of privacy barriers may have a significant impact on their professional roles and relationships. Guseh, Brendel & Brendel (2009, p. 585) Guseh,J.S.,Brendel,R.W.,&Brendel,D.H.(2009).Medicalprofessionalismin theageofonline socialnetworking.JournalofMedical Ethics:JournaloftheInsituteofMedicalEthics,35(9),584-586.
  • 78. Concernsfrom medicine By creating a new environment for individual and group interaction, social- interaction, social-networking sites also create new challenges for those who work challenges for those who work in clinical settings. Take, for example, ... the for example, ... the dermatology resident who is asked on a date by a clinic patient on a date by a clinic patient after he learns from her online profile that she is single online profile that she is single — information that he would have hesitated to would havehesitated to draw out of herin person. Jain (2009, p.650) Jain, S.H.(2009).Becomingaphysician:Practicingmedicine in theageoffacebook.TheNewEnglandJournalofMedicine, 361(7),649-651.
  • 79. Concernsfrom medicine • MacDonald, Sohn, & Ellis (2010) – 338 recentmedical graduates in NewZealand – 65% had Facebook accounts – 24% were publicly accessible • groupofinterest • 66%still activeonlinein thepreceding week • high proportionofusersrevealed location MacDonald,J., Sohn,S.,&Ellis, P. (2010).Privacy,professionalismandfacebook:A dilemmaforyoungdoctors.Medical Education,44(8),805-813.
  • 80. Concernsfrom medicine ... a notable minority belonged to ... groups that we defined as potentially defined as potentially unprofessional (e.g. ‘F*** medicine – I want to be a ninja’, – I want to be a ninja’, which was ‘dedicated to medics who are sick and tired of who are sick and tired of the prospect of a hideously long training time, lack of training time, lack of respect, poor hours and rectal exams on elderly gentlemen’. MacDonald,J., Sohn,S.,&Ellis, P. (2010).Privacy,professionalismandfacebook:A dilemmaforyoungdoctors.Medical Education,44(8),805-813.
  • 81. Concernsfrom psychiatry For psychotherapy, one of the reasons to avoid self-disclosure to patients is to disclosure to patients is to minimize interference with transference, which may be transference, which may be an essential component of the therapeutic process. If the therapeutic process. If patients connected to psychotherapists on a social psychotherapists on a social networking site are able to see pictures, videos, see pictures, videos, comments, and browse through the different relationships of different relationships of their therapist, the transference process will be more process will bemore challenging if not impossible. Lou (2009, p. 20) Lou, J.S.(2009).TheFacebook phenomenon:Boundariesand controversies.PrimaryPsychiatry,16(11), 19-21
  • 82. Concernsfrom clinical psychology • Taylor, McMinn, Bufford & Chang (2010) – online survey oflicensed psychologistsandpsychologygraduates graduates – 695participants,(114 male,580female) – majorityappearedto begraduates – a majorityof thesurvey’s respondents reported thinking aboutthe ramificationsof Taylor,L.,McMinn, M. R.,Bufford,R. K.,&Chang,K. B.T.(2010). Psychologists’attitudesand ethicalconcernsregardingtheuse of socialnetworkingwebsites.ProfessionalPsychology:ResearchandPractice,41(2),153-159.
  • 83. Concernsfrom clinical psychology Some respondents noted that they occasionally found pictures of clients on the pictures of clients on the Web sites of their friends or family members, and that family members, and that they had no prior knowledge of these relationships. A these relationships. A few participants even reported that they had been matched they had been matched to current or former clients through anonymous dating through anonymous dating Web sites. Taylor, McMinn, Bufford &Chang (2010, p. 158) Taylor,L.,McMinn, M. R.,Bufford,R. K.,&Chang,K. B.T.(2010). Psychologists’attitudesand ethicalconcernsregardingtheuse ofsocialnetworkingwebsites.ProfessionalPsychology:ResearchandPractice,41(2),153-159.
  • 84. Concerns fromclinical psychology ... psychologists with the least amount of professional experience will be facing some of experience will be facing some of the most complex situations regarding the distinction regarding the distinction between professional and private information. Normally, early information. Normally, early career psychologists could look to more experienced more experienced psychologists in situations such as this, but if the more experienced if the more experienced psychologists do not understand the nuances of SNWs, they are nuances of SNWs, they are not likely to be able to provide helpful consultation on this helpful consultation on this matter. Taylor,McMinn, Bufford& Chang(2010,p.157) Taylor,L.,McMinn, M. R.,Bufford,R. K.,&Chang,K. B.T.(2010). Psychologists’attitudesand ethicalconcernsregardingtheuse of socialnetworkingwebsites.ProfessionalPsychology:ResearchandPractice,41(2),153-159.
  • 85. ‘Like’is a noun
  • 86. ‘Friend’ is a verb
  • 87. Facebook helps you connect and share with the people in your life.

×