This document discusses research on how Facebook profiles and usage can indicate aspects of a user's personality. Studies have found that extraversion is correlated with having a profile picture from a social scene and with having more Facebook friends. Conscientiousness was not related to the type of profile picture. Emotional stability was related to less frequent changing of profile pictures and status updates. The research suggests that personality traits can be perceived from cues in Facebook profiles, though users may not be aware of the impressions they create online.

1. Facebook Profiles and Usage
as Indicators of Personality
20 Honors
Colloquium

2. The Social Network

3. Facebook has…
• Become the most visited site in the U.S.
• Changed social interactions
– Unique venue
– Self-presentation
– Impression management
– Picture and profile info are
replacing face-to-face
interactions

4. Facebook Profiles & Users’ Personalities
• Vazire & Gosling (2004) studied users’ personalities
conveyed through identity claims
– Accurate interpretation of the user’s personality.
– Extraversion- positively over scored by the observers
– Provide just as much information about individuals’
personalities as their bedroom or office

5. Facebook Profiles & Users’ Personalities
• Gosling, Gaddis & Vazire (2007) focused on “Big 5”
traits and user’s profile & sample of pictures
– Observer consensus: all “Big Five” traits
– Observer accuracy: not emotional stability
– Users’ awareness: only extraversion
– Self-enhancement: emotional stability and
openness to experience

6. One’s Past & Future
Early adolescence (13-14)  Early twenties (20-22)
• More adjusted  use social network websites
• Signs of depression  post inappropriate pictures
(Mikami, Szwedo, Allen, Evans, & Hare, 2010)
Romantic Cues
• Listed “Interested in…”  post “Single”
• “Single” relationship status is most important
(Young, Dutta & Dommety, 2009)

7. Students & Facebook
• Intentionally misrepresent themselves to gain
social acceptance (Peluchette & Karl, 2010)
• Establish an identity & use photos to express
themselves (Calvert, Pempeki, & Yermolayen, 2009)
• Post pictures to form an image (Peluchette & Karl,
2010)
– hardworking
– sexually appealing, wild, or offensive

8. Sharing Pictures
• 87% of college students & recent grads commonly share
pictures on Facebook
– Social gatherings (Watkins & Lee, 2010)
• Profile Pictures
– Extraverts  different style (black & white, altered colors,
or graphically edited) (Kramer & Winter, 2008)
• Background of Picture
– A viewer’s rating of a person’s face in a photo is influenced
more by the emotional valence of the background, than by
the person’s facial expression. (Koji & Fernandes, 2010)

9. Importance
• Research needs to catch up with this new
venue and its effects on social interactions
• This new medium has a lasting fingerprint
– Users may not be aware of the impressions they
are making
– Profiles seen by broad audience
– Can’t modify the behaviors of their “friends”

10. Profile Picture
• Very influential to forming one’s image
• Most widely viewed part of one’s profile
– Hide
• User has complete control
– Others can tag pictures, comment on pictures,
post comments on wall or status
– Untag a picture or delete a comment

11. Personality Traits
“Big 5” – 5 dimensions that “represent the core
description of human personality” (Ciccarelli & White, 2010)
Focused on:
• Extraversion
• Conscientiousness
• Emotional Stability

12. Hypotheses
1. Extraverts are more likely to display a photo from a
social scene.
2. Individuals who score low on conscientiousness are
more likely to have a picture from a social scene.
3. Emotionally stable individuals are less likely to
frequently change their profile photo.

13. Methods
Recruiting participants
• Email to all members of Class of 2014
• Join group on Facebook
– Closed privacy settings
• Participate in the survey event

14. Sample
• Bryant University Class of 2014
• 170 participants (56% male, 44% female)
–Access to 59 profiles (71% male, 29% female)
• Age 18 – 20 (M=18.33, SD=.53)

15. Personality Survey
• The Big 5 Mini-Markers Survey (Saucier, 1994)
• Each trait is correlated with eight items
– 1 (extremely inaccurate) – 9 (extremely accurate)
– Averaged ratings
• Participants with missing data were omitted
from analyses for that trait

16. Extraversion Conscientiousness Emotional Stability
Talkative Organized Unenvious
Extroverted Efficient Relaxed
Bold Systematic Moody*
Energetic Practical Jealous*
Shy* Disorganized* Temperamental*
Quiet* Sloppy* Envious*
Bashful* Inefficient* Touchy*
Withdrawn* Careless* Fretful*
Specific attributes associated with Extraversion, Conscientiousness, and
Emotional Stability, from the Big 5 Mini-Markers Survey (Saucier, 1994).
*Indicates those items which are negatively correlated with the trait and were
reverse scored.

17. Facebook Usage Questions
• Frequency
– Change pic, update status, check profile, “like” pages, join
groups
• Friends
– Number, what groups of people
• Information
– Gender, age, relationship status, visibility of that status
• Accessible
– Phone, iPod, etc.
• Access To Their Profile

18. Picture Coding Scheme
Coding Dimension Dimension Categories
Location • Portrait (location hardly visible)
• Party (user at a party or at any other social scene)
• Area (a lot of background is visible)
Number of
People
• Only the user
• The user and one other person
• Group picture (3 or more people)
•Also coded for: style, face & body visibility, type of photo,
facial expression, looking at the camera
•Recorded number of previous profile pictures
(Kramer & Winter, 2008)

19. MyProfilePicture
MyTwin’sProfilePicture
Coded as:
• Complete Face Visibility
• Full Body Visibility
• Different Style
• Area
• Normal Smile
• Looking at Camera
• One Person
Coded as:
• Partial Face Visibility
• Partial Body Visibility
• Normal Style
• Party
• Making a Face
• Looking at Camera
• Group Picture
Coded as:
• Partial Face Visibility
• Partial Body Visibility
• Normal Style
• Party
• Making a Face
• Not looking at Camera
• Group Picture

20. Results
Extraversion
• Hypothesis 1: High scores  Social Scene
Photo
• Supported
– Party (M=6.21, SD=1.15)
– Not Party (M=5.26, SD=1.28)
– t(52)= 2.69, p=.009
EXTRAVERTS

21. Extraversion is correlated with:
– Number of people in profile picture, t(51)= 1.96, p=.056
– Number of “friends,” r(161)=.32, p<.001
– Frequency of changing profile picture, r(161)=.22, p
=.005
– Frequency of updating status, r(161)= .19, p=.014

22. Conscientiousness
• Hypothesis 2: Low scores  Social Scene
Photo
• Not Supported
– Party (M=6.14, SD=1.24)
– Not party (M=6.11, SD=1.13)
– t(53)=.10, p=.92

23. Included among
Facebook Friends
Mean (SD)
Not Included among
Facebook Friends
Mean (SD) p value
Family 6.43 (1.17) 6.06 (1.01) 0.16
Co-workers 6.49 (1.16) 6.24 (1.15) 0.17
Employers 6.71 (1.12) 6.30 (1.16) *0.08
Comparison of conscientiousness scores for different categories of Facebook friends
Conscientiousness is related to if you are friends with
employers
*Moderately Significant, .05<p<.10

24. Emotional Stability
• Hypothesis 3: High scores  Less Frequently
Change Profile Picture
• Not Supported
– r(52)= -.14, p=.34

25. Emotional Stability
is related to:
• Frequency of updating status, r(162)= -.19, p=.017
• Relationship status visibility when moderated
by
– Relationship status
– Gender
– F (1,153) =20.78, p<.001, ηp
2
=.09

27. Discussion
• Facebook profile information does provide
viewers with important information about the
user’s personality
– Personality traits: extraversion, conscientiousness,
emotional stability
– Cues: profile picture, frequency of picture
changing, status updates, number of friends, types
of friends, and relationship status visibility

28. Limitations
• Small sample size
– However, makes highly significant findings more
compelling
• Self-selection
– Participants had to allow us to view their profile
– Gender seemed to have played a role

29. • Whether viewers perceive these cues about the
user’s personality
• Whether users are aware of the image they are
portraying
– Are they intentionally displaying that personality
– Many students intentionally misrepresent
themselves to gain social acceptance
(Peluchette & Karl, 2010)
• Unforeseen consequences in the future
Future Directions

30. Thank You
20 Honors
Colloquium
Any Questions?