# at the end of March 2012. active = win the last month526 million daily active users on average in March 2012On average more than 300 million photos uploaded to Facebook per day in the three months ended March 31, 2012. 80% of our monthly active users are outside the U.S. and Canada.
Why? Because at the very least FB can help with communication.
Completed 1/1/12For the sake of clarity we placed each article in the category that was most relevant
80% of users are outside USOriginally targeting college students, the fastest growing demographic is users over 34
Founded in 2008Sociologists, psychologists; stats background Facebook has assembled the most incredible dataset in the history of the world.Likely you’ve helped contribute to this datasetdrive informed decisions in areas critical to the success of the company.Basic research Influence how Facebook can help advertisers and the world (ahhh social engineering!)
Granovetter, Boston mailed letter a) meaningany two people were on average separated by no more than fourintermediate connections; further, the degrees of freedom separatingusers is shrinking as Facebook grows; users’friends were most likely to be of a similar age and from thesame country;
providing baseline information on demographic patterns and time-use trendsthat can inform future studies of Facebook activity.
Dunbar, 1998. In many nonhuman primate species, physical groomingplays a significant role in maintaining social bonds and promotinggroup stability. In humans, Dunbar has suggestedthat seemingly superfluous acts like gossip and small talkserve a similar social grooming role.
A 2010survey of 1,193 participants found correlational evidence thatusers who engaged in directed interaction with others, such asleaving wall posts or messaging friends, reported loweredfeelings of loneliness and increased feelings of social capital(Burke et al., 2010). However, users who predominantly spenttime on Facebook passively viewing friends’ content, such asstatus updates and photos, without actively engaging in interactionreported feelings of increased loneliness and reducedsocial capital (Burke et al., 2010). Complementing these findings,a separate study measured the physiological indicators ofemotion by observing participants who browsed Facebook inan undirected manner for 5 min while in a lab setting. Theresearchers found that users who engaged in extractive socialsearching (e.g., directed clicking on a friends’ profiles) showedgreater physiological evidence of pleasure than users whobrowsed passively (e.g., undirected viewing of the news feed;Wise, Alhabash, & Park, 2010). Together, these studies demonstratethat a complex relationship exists between differingtypes of user engagement and the consequent benefits gainedfrom Facebook use.
Users create profile, but also influence of others acting on a profile
Accuracy criterion = (consisting of the participants’ self-ratings and ratingsof the participant by multiple informants who knew the participants offline)Other research has supportedthis finding, concluding that although some self-enhancementmay occur, profile owners are generally portraying a fairlyaccurate representation of their offline identity
although narcissists presented an idealized online profile, independent raterssaw through the deception and accurately judged the profile authors as narcissisticMention role of cultural norms, different countries, age groups, ethnicitiesGermans vs. U.S. Inappropriate content
observers’ impressions of Facebook users are also affected by the user’s number of friends and the characteristics of friends, especially those who write on the wall of the useruserswith walls where the posts were left by attractive people were judged to be more attractive than those very same users when the same posts were left by unattractive usersSUM: these studies demonstrate that friend characteristics provide indirect yet meaningful contributions to perceived profile identity
the use of detailed privacy controls to limit the access of certain friends, choosing more privatecommunication channels for certain information (e.g., messagingrather than posting on others’ walls), and self-censoringpotentially problematic content
Psychster robert wilson_onfacebook_june2012_v2_updated
Psychster Inc. Psychster Labs Presents Robert Wilson Washington University in St. Louis Facebook in the Social Sciences: What do we know and where do we go?6.22.2012 webinar hosted by: Contact our speaker:David C. Evans Ph.D. email@example.com Robert Wilson firstname.lastname@example.orgPsychster Inc. facebookinthesocialsciences.orgpsychster.com@Psychster
facebook.com901 million monthly active users125 billion friend connections300 million photos uploaded per day80% of our monthly active users areoutside the U.S. and Canada.3500+ employeesValued at about $100 billion Psychster Inc.
Purpose of today’s talk… “The biggest challenges Facebook has to solve are the same challenges [faced by] the social sciences” -Cameron Marlow Head of FB Data TeamWhat has empirical research in thesocialsciences discovered about Facebook? MIT Technology Review Psychster Inc.
REVIEW OF THE FACEBOOK LITERATUREConducted with Sam Gosling and Lindsay GrahamThis is the first major review of the Facebook literature Wilson, R.E., Gosling, S.D., & Graham, L.T. (2012). A review of Facebook research in the social sciences. Perspectives in Psychological Science, 7(3), 203 - 220 Psychster Inc.
To be included as relevant in ourfinal review, a source must have:1. specifically investigated Facebook2. been published in a peer-reviewed academic journal or peer-reviewed conference proceedings3. reported empirical findings Psychster Inc.
Who studies Facebook?• Scholars of law, economics, sociology, and psychology, to information technology, management, marketing, and computer-mediated communication.• A large international presence• In short….everyone is trying to better understand the impact of Facebook Psychster Inc.
Why study Facebook?1. Behavior residue leaves concrete, observable data.2. To understand contemporary society, social scientists must study Facebook.3. Necessary to carefully examine the positive and negative effects of Facebook on society. Psychster Inc.
900 450 Users and Articles: Totals by Year 800 412 400 22,000 commercial organizations allowed to join 700 350 FB expands to add high school networksTotal Users (millions) 600 300 Total # of Articles FB expands to Anyone over 13 yrs Stanford, Columbia, with an email allowed 500 250 and Yale to join articles 800 college 226 400 networks allowed 200 to join 300 Feb, 2004: 150 FB founded at Harvard 138 200 100 70 100 50 0 1 9 22 0 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 LAUNCH FB Wall FB Photos FB Mobile, FB FB in Spanish, Introduction Launch of Launch of DATE OF News Feed, Platform French, and of the ‘Like’ FB Places Timeline FEATURES: and API and Video German. button and and video Launch of FB FB Payments calling Connect Psychster Inc.
5 Key questions1. Who is using Facebook and what are users doing while on Facebook?2. Why do people use Facebook?3. How are people presenting themselves on Facebook?4. How is Facebook affecting relationships among groups and individuals?5. Why are people disclosing personal information on Facebook despite potential risks? Psychster Inc.
Who is using Facebook and what are users doing while on Facebook?Facebook Stats: average user has 130 friends contributes 90 pieces of content permonth connected to an average of 80community pages, groups, andevents http://newsroom.fb.com/ Psychster Inc.
Facebook Data Team• 12 person team of in-house researchers• Have full access to the anonymized web logs of all Facebook users• They plan on doubling their staff this year MIT Technology Review, Psychster Inc. Facebook Data Team
Facebook Data Team2 recent studies with theUniversita degli Studi di MilanoN = 721 million users, 69 billionfriendships(a) 92% of users were connected by only four degrees of separation(b) researchers found a curvilinear, highly skewed distribution such that 20% of users had fewer than 25 friends, 50% of users had over 100 friends, and a small percentage of people had close to 5,000 friends(c) the average number of Facebook friends in the United States was 214 Psychster Inc.
Research Methods1) Recruitment of participants in offline contexts2) Recruitment of participants via Facebook applications3) Data crawling of public info Ninety-seven (24%) of the 412 articles in our review focused on descriptive analysis of Facebook users Psychster Inc.
Demographic Findings• n = 77,954• In the U.S., thebreakdown ofethnicities on Facebook has grown morediverse over time and currently mirrors theproportions represented in the U.S. population Chang, Rosenn, Backstrom, & Marlow, 2010 Psychster Inc. http://www.viewsoftheworld.net/?p=1011
Demographic FindingsTop 5 countries- U.S. (155 million)- Indonesia (36.6 million)- U.K. (29.8 million)- India (25.5 million)- Turkey (28.4 million) Carmichael, 2011 For a breakdown of users by continent, see www.internetworldstats.com/facebook. htm). Psychster Inc.
2. Why do people useFacebook?Seventy-eight (19%) articles examined what motivatespeopleto use Facebook. Psychster Inc.
To keep in touch with friends?Weak verses strong tiesSocial grooming? =? Psychster Inc.
Minimizing loneliness? It’s complex Active verses passive FB use Burke et al., 2010 Wise, Alhabash, & Park, 2010 Psychster Inc.
Relieve boredom?Facebook use remained high regardlessof how busy people were Pempek, Yermolayeva, & Calvert, 2009 Psychster Inc.
What motivates people to contributecontent?Internal motives and external influence54% of interactions between pairs ofusers who interact infrequently weredirectly attributable to Facebook’sbirthday reminder feature Viswanath et al., 2009 Psychster Inc.
3. How are people presenting themselves onFacebook?Fifty (12%) of the articles in our reviewinvestigated identity presentationIdentity presentation centers on the userprofile Psychster Inc.
Are users presentingthemselves accurately onFacebook?Researchers tested whether profiles representedidealized virtual identities or accurate portrayals of theusers’ personalitiesStrangers’ ratings of participants based solely on theparticipants’ user profiles were compared with anaccuracy criterion and with participants’ ideal-selfratings. Takeaway: Facebook profiles convey fairly accurate personality impressions of profile owners Gosling, Gaddis, & Vazire, 2007 Psychster Inc. Back et al., 2010
Why might people present themselvesaccurately?1) Friendships usually start offline2) People generally want to be seen by others as they see themselves3) Contributions by others is difficult to control Psychster Inc.
But might some people self-enhance?What about narcissists? Can you spot the self-enhancer? Buffardi & Campbell, 2008 Psychster Inc.
Content contribution by othersA curvilinear relationship exists between auser’s number of friends and observers’ratings of the user’s attractiveness andextraversion the attractiveness of the people leavingposts on a user’s wall affected impressionsof the user Walther, Van Der Heide, Hamel, & Shulman, 2009 Psychster Inc.
How is Facebook affecting relationshipsamong groups and individuals?Research on social interactions wasstudied frequently, in 112 (27%) articles.Positive and negative impacts between:Student-faculty; employee-management;business-customer; doctor-patient; ect. Psychster Inc.
Impact for business-customerrelationshipFB involvement shown to increase customeractivityFB gives businesses instant customerfeedback Dholakia & Durham, 2010 Pantano, Tavernise, & Viassone, 2010 Psychster Inc.
Impact for student-faculty relationship Students predicted a positive classroomenvironment and high motivation when a teachershared more personal information on his or herFacebook profile page But other literature warns of being seen as “creepy” only 4% of users’ wall posting refer toeducation, and the vast majority of students report notcontacting university staff for any reason A thorough review of this area exists (Hew, 2011) Lipka, 2007; Madge, Meek, Wellens, & Hooley, 2009 ; Mazer, Murphy, & Simonds, 2009; Selwyn, 2009 Psychster Inc.
Impact for business-employee relationship Evaluating job candidates on Facebook? Employers can inadvertently learn about a candidate’s marital status, age, and other off- limits info These are topics that are not legal bases for hiring decisions according to equal opportunity laws in the United StatesKarl, Peluchette, & Schlaegel, 2010a, 2010b; Kluemper & Rosen, 2009 Psychster Inc.
Impact for business-employeerelationshipSome applicants are judged with disproportionateseverity when they post inappropriate material.Ex. females typically judged more harshlyTakeaways:a) Don’t post inappropriate material on FBb) Employers may be open to discrimination lawsuits Psychster Inc.
Tension across social sphereson FB?Users’ friends on Facebook often includeoverlapping social groups(e.g., family, friends, employers)Does this overlap cause tension?Users implement a number of strategies tomitigate tension Lampinen et al., 2009 Psychster Inc.
5. Why are people disclosing personalinformation on Facebook despite potentialrisks?Research on privacy and personalinformation disclosure was the focus of 75articles (18%) in our review.Facebook is only as good as the content that users shareMotivation to promote sharing Balanced with concern for privacy Psychster Inc.
Privacy perception studies Over 50% of participants provided their current addressand 40% of participants provided their phone number, butonly a handful of individuals changed the highly permissiveprivacy settings Awareness of privacy and security issues had increasedover time But a disparity between users’ privacy concerns andbehaviorEx. 16% of respondents who reported being “very worried”about the possibility that a stranger knew where they livedand the location of their classes still revealed both pieces ofinformation on their Facebook profile Acquisti & Gross, 2006 Psychster Inc.
The privacy paradoxPrivacy concerns were primarily determined by theperceived likelihood of a privacy violation andmuch less by the expected damagePrivacy concerns and disclosure were notnegatively correlated, suggesting that they may notbe two ends of the same spectrum butindependent behaviors influenced by differentaspects of personalityKrasnova, Kolesnikova, & Guenther, 2009; Christofides et al., 2009;McKnight, Lankton, & Tripp, 2011 Psychster Inc.
The privacy paradoxAn influence of social learning oninformation disclosureNew members were closely monitoring andadapting to what their friends were doingand that the experiences in the first 2 weekspredicted long-term sharing. Psychster Inc.
CONCLUSIONS1. Who is using Facebook and what are users doing while on Facebook?2. Why do people use Facebook?3. How are people presenting themselves on Facebook?4. How is Facebook affecting relationships among groups and individuals?5. Why are people disclosing personal information on Facebook despite potential risks? Psychster Inc.
Continuing ResearchFacebook represents a fundamental shift inthe role of the Internet in daily lifeResearch has been revealing but muchremains to be discoveredWe are maintaining a website that providesresearchers with a rolling bibliography ofFacebook articles.Facebookinthesocialsciences.org Psychster Inc.
Useful LinksBibliography of social networking sites - maintained by danah boyd:http://www.danah.org/researchBibs/sns.phpFacebook Data Team website: http://www.facebook.com/dataFB Data Team’s most recent publications. http://www.facebook.com/data/app_190322544333196The Facebook Project – A great general resource sitehttp://www.thefacebookproject.com/about/index.htmlInternet Research Ethics - A resource on best practice internet researchmethods and ethical considerations: http://internetresearchethics.org/World distribution stats of Facebook users:http://www.internetworldstats.com/facebook.htm Psychster Inc.
Robert WilsonThank you! Washington University in St. Louis Info: http://facebookinthesocialsciences.org/ Paper: Your school library or http://pps.sagepub.com/content/7/3/203 Recording: http://psychster.com Psychster Labs: email@example.com @Psychster Psychster Inc.