The Effects of Social Media on Psychological Well Being

1,184 views

Published on

This examined if social networking use among university students adversely affected psychological well being, and academic performance.

Published in: Career
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,184
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
44
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The Effects of Social Media on Psychological Well Being

  1. 1. The Effects OF Social Media on Psychological Well-being FERNANDO SALAZAR UNIVERSITY OF DALLAS
  2. 2. PROBLEM  - The use of social media has increased dramatically (Lenhart, Purcell, Smith, Zickuhr 2011). With the emergence of an “online self” how does social media effect things like psychological well-being, addictive tendencies, and academic performance?
  3. 3. PREVIOUS LITERATURE  Observed effects in personal factors like internet addiction and self esteem, as well as social factors such as peer relationships and online image.  Wilson, Forsier, & White (2010) found that self esteem positively predicted addictive social networking use and suggested its use as social stimulation.  Stefone (2011) found that amount of time spent managing profiles significantly regressed on contingency of self worth.
  4. 4. PREVIOUS LITERATURE  Shaw (2002) found that scores in self esteem significantly differed after an online chat session, suggested social communication could be beneficial.  Kalpidou, Costin, and Morris (2011) found negative correlations between number of Facebook friends and emotional/academic adjustment, but a positive correlation between social adjustment.  Kramer & Winter (2008) found people with high self efficacy significantly differed in number of friends, and number of words on profile, compared to those with low self efficacy.
  5. 5. HYPOTHESES  H1: Self esteem and GPA will negatively predict Facebook Compulsivity  H2: Differences between men and women in FB compulsivity, GPA, and Self Esteem  H3: Men and women differ in ranked FB activities
  6. 6. PROCEDURE  Non-probabilistic convenience sample  40 University of Dallas students  Administered the Facebook Compulsivity survey, Rosenberg’s Self-Esteem test, and a ranking of Facebook activities  Administered in two different classes
  7. 7. SURVEY  I measured Facebook compulsivity on a 5 point Likert scale.  Questions: “I feel anxious and upset when I cannot access my Facebook page” and“ I feel excited and energized when I access my Facebook page”.  Measured Self-Esteem on a 5 point Likert scale  Questions:“I feel I do not have much to be proud of” and “I feel that I have a number of good qualities”
  8. 8. SURVEY  Self reported GPA was measured on a 5 point interval scale  Ranked Facebook activities (most frequent/less frequent)  Ranked Examples: “Viewing profiles other than your own” and “Monitoring friends’ activity from your home page.”
  9. 9. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS  Regression was conducted, with Facebook compulsivity as the dependent variable and GPA and self-esteem scores as the independent variables.  Independent samples t test was conducted to see if mean self esteem scores differed between men and women.  Wilcoxon test on ranked differences in FB activities between gender
  10. 10. RESULTS ANOVA Model Sum of Squares df F Sig. Regressio n 302.746 2 3.203 .032 Residual 1701.613 36Predictors: (Constant), SE, GPA Dependent Variable: FB Coefficients Dependent Variable: FB GPA was a significant predictor of Facebook compulsivity: F(2,36)=3.203, p=.032 GPA negatively predicted Facebook compulsivity R2 =.151, β=-.350, t=-2.275, p=.029 Self-esteem was not a significant predictor β=.161, t=1.050, p=.301 Model Std. Error Beta t Sig. GPA 1.960 -.350 -2.275 .029 SE .318 .161 1.050 .301
  11. 11. RESULTS Model F Sig. t df Sig.(2 tailed) GPA 16.093 .000 -1.828 31.18 .077 FB .043 .837 -1.540 38 .132 SE .255 .617 -1.082 38 .286 ndependent Samples t-test Men and Women did not differ on: GPA, Self Esteem, or Facebook Compulsivity Model Gender Mean Std. Dev. GPA Male 4.1000 .31623 Female 4.3793 .62185 FB Male 19.1000 7.34015 Female 23.0667 6.96263 SE Male 31.9000 3.07137 Female 33.3000 3.67799 Wilcoxon Test z p 0.23 0.81 Men and Women did not differ on FB activities ranking
  12. 12. DISCUSSION  Studies like Shaw (2002) seem to point to online communication as supplemental to the need to communicate socially, while Kalpidou, Costin & Morris (2011) and Wilson, Fornasier & White (2010) seem to oppose to this as they found it had adverse effects emotionally.  Larger scope of studies conclude that internet and social networking use can be detrimental or beneficial to the user depending on the frequency and type of interaction the user engages in.
  13. 13. LIMITATIONS  I did not have a large representation of males in my sample.  My participants were all students of psychology
  14. 14. DIRECTION FOR FUTURE RESEARCH  Could there be a difference in FB compulsivity according to major?  T-test on FB compulsivity and major  Greater diversity of major in participants  Better representation of males and females  Kalpidou, Costin & Morris(2011) found differences in Facebook use between upper and lower classmen  Since GPA was the only significant finding, investigate differences in FB activities ranking between high/low GPA to see how these groups differed
  15. 15. OVERVIEW  My study succeeded in finding an association between compulsive Facebook tendencies and academic performance, but failed to reproduce findings in psychological well-being  Adds to the body of literature that highlights the association between this new medium and our personal lives.

×