- Email: [email protected]
The effects of social media on students’ behaviors; Facebook as a case study
Computers in Human Behavior 59 (2016) 374e379
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Computers in Human Behavior journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh
Full length article
The effects of social media on students’ behaviors; Facebook as a case study Tugberk Kaya a, *, Huseyin Bicen b a b
Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Near East University, North Cyprus, Via Mersin 10, Turkey Ataturk Faculty of Education, Near East University, North Cyprus, Via Mersin 10, Turkey
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history: Received 17 September 2015 Received in revised form 27 November 2015 Accepted 9 February 2016 Available online xxx
Social networks are one of the most used communication methods of today's world. Their use in different fields has been examined in several research studies. This study aims to examine the effects of social media on student's behaviors which will mainly focus on Facebook. Whether there is a positive relationship between confidence, social media participation and social media related behaviors will also be assed with regard to using Facebook. In order to collect the primary data, a general scanning model was used to observe attitudes of high school students. The participants chosen were 362 high school students from level 9 to 12. The findings highlight that Facebook is used for communication entertainment and sharing news, pictures and songs. In addition, their Facebook profile picture is alone and students were aware that swearing is considered a form of misconduct, which is a good sign. The study also indicates that students were aware of protecting their social identity as their Facebook shares are not public. Furthermore, they respect privacy as they do not use their friend's Facebook account. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Social networks Facebook Attitudes Behaviors High school students
1. Introduction The first known communication tool/technique was the cave painting. Communication through cave paintings was a very important part of early human society (Morriss-Kay, 2009). While the importance of communication continues, the worldwide penetration of computers and the Internet has resulted online mediums where people can communicate. Classmates.com was the first social networking site, founded in 1995 (Meltzer & Philips, 2009). Nowadays, social networking sites give users a form of online identity. The world's largest social network, Facebook, has more than 1.31 billion mobile active users and 1.49 billion monthly active users (Facebook, 2015). Furthermore, recent studies show that 90% of 18e29 year olds in USA use social networks and a high percentage (between 85 and 99%) of students use Facebook (Brenner, 2013; Matney & Borland, 2009). Facebook use and multitasking showed a significant difference and impact on GPA within different levels of undergraduate students in the USA (Junco, 2015). The term “unfriend” was added to the Oxford Dictionary, defined as “To remove someone as a ‘friend’ on a social networking
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ90 392 675 10 00x3104. E-mail address: [email protected] (T. Kaya). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.036 0747-5632/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
site such as Facebook” (Gross, 2009). For that reason, this research had been carried out in order to observe the attitudes and Facebook usage of students and to examine behaviors of students on social media, especially Facebook. 1.1. Related research As social media is about interaction, there is also knowledge management process where social-learning concept analysed by Zhang et al. (2015). Learning via virtual world also had been analysed by Zhang, Zhu, and de Pablos (2012). Krasnova, Hildebrand, Guenther, Kovrigin, and Nowobilska (2008) stated that the use of social networks can satisfy esteem as users can present themselves to friends who think similarly and have common interests. Tobi, Ma’on, and Ghazali (2013) mentioned the popularity of online social networks and conducted a study assessing if their use had any impact on the social and psychological health of Malaysian students. The authors suggest that it has a positive effect on the health of the students. Tobi et al. (2013) also further mentioned that this has a positive impact of user confidence. In addition, Kimball and Rheingold (2003) and Krasnova et al. (2008) argued that using social networking sites (e.g. Facebook and MySpace) increases user happiness and can reduce depression if Facebook envy is controlled (Tandoc, Ferrucci, & Duffy, 2015). However, it is also argued that
T. Kaya, H. Bicen / Computers in Human Behavior 59 (2016) 374e379
rka, & social network use can depress people (Błachnio, Przepio Pantic, 2015). Pearse (2012) suggested that people with a high score on the Narcissist Personality Inventory questionnaire change their profile picture more often, which can be an indication that engagement of people with low scores can be lower on Facebook. Wu et al. (2015) conducted a study on Facebook profile pictures and personalities and declared that collaborative learning happens when the user changes their profile picture. The authors stated that users have a tendency to know what is gaining attention among their friends and upload the same style profile picture to reflect the same positive message. Marshall, Lefringhausen, and Ferenczi (2015) also stated that there is a relationship between narcissism and the number of Facebook updates of an individual. Kauten, Lui, Stary, and Barry (2015) further mentioned that narcissism is notable among social media users. Ortigosa, Carro, et al. (2014) and Ortigosa, Martín, et al. (2014) indicated that users use social networks in order to support existing real-world relationships rather than to look for new virtual social relationships. Moran, Seaman, and Tinti-Kane (2011) carried out a study in a faculty which suggested that 77% of respondents have social media engagement, while 60% stated that they use social media in the classroom. Research by Roblyer, McDaniel, Webb, Herman, and Witty (2010) highlighted that students are greatly concerned about their privacy, with only 15% declaring that they feel their privacy is invaded when the faculty encourages Facebook use for education. In addition, it is also stated that use of Facebook for education is interesting for students (Roblyer et al., 2010). Blight, Jagiello, and Ruppel (2015) conducted a study on college students and highlighted the fact that students seek support via Facebook: “There is a positive relationship between using Facebook and forming and maintaining social capital, which is defined as ‘the resources accumulated through the relationships among people’ (Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007, p. 1145 cited in Junco, Merson, & Salter, 2010, p. 162). As Facebook enables self-disclosure, it was also mentioned that Facebook use enables higher levels of learning and increase motivation of students (Mazer, Murphy, & Simonds, 2007). The above shows that there are both pros and cons concerning Facebook and suggests that further studies are required. From the findings above, the importance of engagement was highlighted. The term engagement has various explanations such as “the amount of student learning and development associated with an educational program is directly related to the quality and quantity of student engagement in that program” and “the effectiveness of any educational practice is directly related to the ability of that practice to increase student engagement” (Astin, 1984, cited in Junco, 2012, p. 164). 1.2. Theoretical background As mentioned above, starting from cave paintings, people have always used communication. Communication allows us to form relationships with others, which was defined as “social” level needs by Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (Dessler, 2008). With the advancement of technology, communication has become easier. Nowadays, people can spread their thoughts and opinions with a couple of clicks via social networks. “…the need to belong is a powerful, fundamental, and extremely pervasive motivation” (Baumeister & Leary, 1995, p.497). The importance of belonging can be understood from the previous statement and it is mentioned that social networks satisfy the need of belong of individuals (Krasnova et al., 2008; Seidman, 2013). According to Nadkarni and Hofmann (2012) Facebook is also used for self-presentation while Peluchette and Karl (2010) further mentioned that some students share inappropriate materials on Facebook in order to get the
375
attention of their classmates. Teacher use of Facebook is received to have a positive effect on students where it is argued that it increases their motivation and learning (Mazer et al., 2007). Likewise, there are a variety of studies that have been carried out to demonstrate there is a relationship between Facebook use and individual characteristics ranging from agreeableness to esteem level (Lee, Moore, Park, & Park, 2012; Winter et al., 2014). In addition, Lee, Ahn, and Kim (2014) stated that extroverts use Facebook (status/photo share and using like button) more often than introverts. According to Grieve and Kemp (2015), extraversion and openness are related in the context of Facebook connectedness and Marshall et al. (2015) mentioned that there are more Facebook shares of social activities amongst extroverts. Photo/video sharing and album uploads show significant differences among different personalities (Eftekhar, Fullwood, & Morris, 2014). 2. Purpose of the study This study aims to examine students' behaviors on Facebook. Whether there is a positive relationship between confidence and social media participation will also be assed. The drawbacks of using Facebook will also be discussed in the research. It is expected that this study will be useful to highlight student behaviors on social media, as today's students are “digital natives” who were born with new technology and display excessive social network use (Prensky, 2001). Since the 2000s, there has been worldwide Internet penetration and technological advances such as smartphones with free communication methods (Facebook, WhatsApp, Viber etc.). It is argued that shift in student habits will also cause shifts in their behaviors. The research aims are as follows; 1 Determining the social network use of students 2 To figure out respondents' behaviors among the Facebook use
3. Methods 3.1. Participants In order to gather primary data, 362 high school students were surveyed from Türk Maarif Koleji, Bülent Ecevit Anadolu Lisesi and 20 Temmuz Fen Lisesi. 202 participants were female (56%) and 160 were male (44%). 45 (13%) of the respondents were 15 years old, 65 (18%) were 16 years old and the majority 160 of participants were 17 (44%) and 92 (25%) of the respondents were 18 years old as Table 1 demonstrates. The majority of the participants (f ¼ 138) were studying Mathematics and Science (AS-Level), followed by Turkish and Mathematics (92) and A-Level courses (57). There were also participants from the Arts (41) and Science (34) fields. 3.2. Equipment The questionnaire was prepared by the authors and is composed of 51 positive statements in order to evaluate the confidence level, engagement and the effect of educational studies. A 5 point Likert
Table 1 Age of respondents. Age
(f)
%
15 16 17 18
45 65 160 92
13 18 44 25
376
T. Kaya, H. Bicen / Computers in Human Behavior 59 (2016) 374e379
scale was used, where reliability and validity was calculated by the Cronbach's alpha value, which was 0.88 for the whole scale yet some of the respondents might respond unreasonably therefore the research can contain some limitation. 3.3. Data analysis T-test, one way ANOVA and mean statistics were calculated by using IBM SPSS Statistics 20 programme in order to observe the students’ behaviours on social media. 4. Results & discussion 4.1. Social network use of the respondents The majority of the participants (f ¼ 315) have smartphones (87%) while 47 of them do not have any kind of smartphone (13%). Android (f ¼ 171) was the most used Operating System (47%), followed by iOS (f ¼ 139, %39). There was also a small number of Windows (f ¼ 5) users where f ¼ 47 of the students answered “None” to the question “What is the operating system of your mobile device?”, which also clarifies that the number do not have any kind of smartphone. 247 (68%) of the students said that they have an Internet package on their mobile whereas 115 (32%) said they do not have any such package. It is argued that this might be due to the availability of Wi-Fi hotspots in the majority of the public places (Horrigan, 2009; Taylor, Young, & Noronha, 2012). As it can be seen from Table 2, the authors argue that high Facebook use (f ¼ 356) might be due to the lifestyle of participants. Recent research shows that narcissistic people update their Facebook status more often, which supports the authors' assertion (Pearse, 2012; Winter et al., 2014). YouTube (f ¼ 307) and Instagram (f ¼ 250) were among the most used social networks, which was not surprising as YouTube has more than 1 billion users with 300 h of video uploaded every minute and Instagram has 300 million monthly active users and 70 million photograph/video uploaded daily (YouTube, 2015; Instagram, 2015). This indicates that YouTube can also be a channel for supporting education in which teachers have the chance of either finding supportive videos or uploading videos themselves. Likewise, module/class information can be shared on Instagram. As visualisation is effective for education ~o, & Costales, 2012; Crnovrsanin, Muelder, Faris, (Cadavieco, Goula Felmlee, & Ma, 2014), Authors of this paper argues that using channels that students prefer will be effective to support their education. Fill (2011) argued that effective dialogue happens when people have been contacted from their preferred medium of choice. High WhatsApp (f ¼ 280) use is also understandable as it is an instant messaging service providing free messaging (Pachal, 2014).
Table 2 Social Network Use of respondents. Social network
(f)
%
Facebook YouTube WhatsApp Instagram Foursquare (Swarm) Viber Twitter Snapchat Googleþ Askfm Tumblr Tango Vine
356 307 280 250 247 212 146 140 138 82 74 67 40
98 85 77 69 68 59 40 39 38 23 20 19 11
The application had 900 million active users by September 2015 who contributed 64 billion messages per day (D'Onfro, 2015; Statista, 2015). This application could be used for instant notification for students if there is a schedule change or a class dismissal. Twitter was one of the least used social networks among students (f ¼ 146), which is not a good sign as previous research showed that it can be effective for life-learning education of the students (Grosseck & Holotescu, 2011). Nevertheless, as 38% of the students were using Twitter, this still indicates that this social network can be used for further studies although student preferences within the social network must be taken into consideration. In addition to Twitter, low Google þ use (f ¼ 138) was not surprising as it is not a common social network used by students. It is advised that teachers must not have interaction with their students through their private social networks, they can participate via schools' groups on social media. It is argued that social networks will be ever more connected in the future, and thus it will be advantageous if social network accounts of schools or modules were connected. 4.2. Highest and least ranked statements of respondents The highest and lowest ranked statements given by the results are shown below; 4.2.1. Highest ranked statements As highlighted by Table 3, statement H1, “I communicate by Facebook” was the highest ranked choice (M: 3.98), which was not surprising as Facebook is one of the most used communication platforms (Sachoff, 2009; Wu & Lo, 2014). Statement H2, “I share pictures on Facebook” was the second highest choice (M: 3.85), which is a decent indication that the lecture notes should include pictures, as visualisation is effective for the effective learning of students (Cadavieco et al., 2012; Crnovrsanin et al., 2014). If pictures are used, it may trigger sharing of lecture notes via social networks which may support learning of students. High Facebook sharing can be interpreted as an indication of narcissism (Pearse, 2012; Marshall et al., 2015). Statement H3, “I follow news on Facebook” was the third highest choice, which demonstrates that students can follow school news and information updates from Facebook. Statement H4, “Content I share changes according to my mood” received (M: 3.56). From this statement it can be understood that there is a risk of low engagement in lectures if students see something that can affect their mood on Facebook. Statement H10, “I know that swearing on Facebook is a form of misconduct (is not legal)” was in the highest 10 (M: 3.24), which is a good sign indicating that students will act according to the school rules and regulations. In addition, there is also a risk that shy students might not engage in Facebook, if the network will be used as supportive learning environment where it is seen from the Statement H8 “My profile picture is alone” was the 8th highest ranked choice (M ¼ 3.33) among the 51 statements, showing that there may be an indication of narcissism. Nevertheless, the highest 10 statements indicate that students have a high tendency to share content (e.g. pictures, songs, news, videos) on Facebook and have high use for communication which indicates their engagement within the social network is high. This also supports the 98% use statistics amongst social networks. “Nice picture comments increase my confidence” is among the highest ranked statements. Along the same lines, Bright, Kleiser, and Grau (2015) indicated that confidence decreases social media fatigue. Thus, it could be mentioned that participants do have a significant confidence as they extensively use Facebook. “My profile picture is up to date” is also the highest ranked statement. In addition to this, students frequently share content which can be interpreted that they are following recent styles and trends
T. Kaya, H. Bicen / Computers in Human Behavior 59 (2016) 374e379
377
Table 3 Highest ranked statements. Statement
Mean
Std.
H1 e I communicate by Facebook. H2 e I share pictures on Facebook H3 e I follow news on Facebook. H4 e Content I share changes according to my mood. H5 e I follow specific friends on Facebook. H6 e I use Facebook just for fun. H7 e I share songs on Facebook. H8 e My profile picture is alone H9 e I share news on Facebook. H10 e I know that swearing on Facebook is a form of misconduct (is not legal). H11 e I share videos on Facebook. H12 e I follow specific brands/products on Facebook. H13 e I check in places regularly on Facebook. H14 e Nice picture comments increase my confidence. H15 e My profile picture is up to date. H16 e My other social network accounts are connected with Facebook. H17 e I use Facebook in order to meet with new people.
3.98 3.85 3.65 3.56 3.55 3.53 3.43 3.33 3.26 3.24 3.24 3.15 3.02 3.01 3.01 2.85 2.81
1.034 1.094 1.191 1.405 1.258 1.193 1.355 1.405 1.337 1.531 1.36 1.296 1.326 1.287 1.334 1.464 1.31
and act accordingly, supported by the findings of Wu et al. (2015). “I use Facebook in order to meet with new people” is amongst the highest ranked statements, which contradicts the findings of Ortigosa, Carro, et al. (2014) and Ortigosa, Martín, et al. (2014).
4.2.2. Least ranked statements Table 4 indicates that “I use my friends’ Facebook account” (M: 1.64) and “My privacy settings are public in order to get more likes” (M: 1.61) received low scores, which may ensure that the security and confidentiality problems are minimal (Turban, King, & Lang, 2012). This result contradicts the findings of Roblyer et al. (2010) in which 15% of participants mentioned that they feel their privacy is invaded. It can be argued that students who had participated in this research are aware of privacy issues and they prefer to keep their shares limited to Facebook friends. “I use Facebook in order to gossip” (M: 1.66) and “I fool/deceive people on Facebook” also received low scores (M: 1.51) on the questionnaire. This is encouraging as it ensures that one to one arguments will not arise or kept minimal on Facebook. Enabling a peaceful social network environment is important as otherwise relationships can be damaged between students (Mollenhorst, Volker, & Flap, 2014). Surprisingly “I change my profile picture in order to get attention” was one of the least ranked choices, contradicting the findings of Wu et al. (2015).
4.3. Medium ranked statements Table 5 indicates that participants do not usually play games, share trailers and their own videos or use Facebook to find popular places either. In spite of “Nice picture comments increase my confidence” (M: 3.01) being 14th and in the highest ranked statements, “My Facebook use increases my confidence” (M: 2.38) was 29th answer, which shows that Facebook use did not affect the confidence of the participants. There was no indication of depression as “I feel isolated when I cannot login to Facebook” (M: 2.14) and “Negative picture comments depress me” scored (M: 1.93).
5. Conclusion and future studies In this research it is argued that Facebook will be an alternative for communication of students. It is also highlighted that as smartphone ownership is high (87%), students are digital natives and have access to Wi-Fi, it is easy to communicate via Facebook. Along the same lines, Facebook can also be used as a communication medium for consulting students after school hours. They can open conversation groups for their modules or related homework/ projects. By this approach, students will become able to communicate both with classmates and teachers. A fast and effective communication method will also enable after class help when it is required. This shows that, there is an opportunity for Facebook to
Table 4 Least ranked statements. Statement
Mean
Std.
L17 e I start up new debates by Facebook. L16 e My privacy settings are public in order to get more likes. L15 e I use Facebook for Politics. L14 e Negative picture comments depress me. L13 e I share my Facebook password with my friends. L12 e I accept every friend request. L11 e I change my profile picture in order to get attention. L10 e I use Facebook in order to gossip. L9 e I use my friends' Facebook account. L8 e I use Facebook in order to get attention. L7 e My privacy settings are public in order to get more likes. L6 e I fool/deceive people on Facebook. L5 e My profile picture is a famous person. L4 e I can buy Likes on Facebook. L3 e I can buy followers on Twitter. L2 e I update my relationship status instantly in order to get attention. L1 e I can buy Retweets on Twitter.
2.01 1.99 1.98 1.93 1.81 1.76 1.70 1.66 1.64 1.61 1.61 1.51 1.44 1.37 1.35 1.34 1.31
1.205 1.153 1.17 1.119 1.245 1.124 1.063 1.125 1.111 1.042 1.042 1.082 1.003 .945 .887 .910 .832
378
T. Kaya, H. Bicen / Computers in Human Behavior 59 (2016) 374e379
Table 5 Medium ranked statements. Statement
Mean
Std.
M1 e I follow famous people on Facebook. M2 e My details are up to date. M3 e I change my privacy according to closeness. M4 e My profile picture is with my friends. M5 e I check Facebook but I do not like or comment on the content that people share. M6 e I change my profile picture regularly. M7 e I check my previous partners' Facebook profile. M8 e I share trailers on Facebook. M9 e I share my own videos on Facebook. M10 e I play games on Facebook. M11 e I use Facebook in order to find out popular places. M12 e My Facebook use increases my confidence. M13 e I generate new ideas by Facebook. M14 e I use Facebook in order to check mutual friends. M15 e I become upset if I do not receive any likes or comments on my status/pictures or content that I had share. M16 e I feel isolated when I cannot login to Facebook. M17 e I accept friend request according to the gender.
2.78 2.73 2.71 2.71 2.64 2.64 2.53 2.51 2.49 2.47 2.42 2.38 2.36 2.27 2.24 2.14 2.11
1.421 1.3 1.375 1.34 1.197 1.202 1.494 1.361 1.355 1.418 1.285 1.131 1.302 1.203 1.259 1.219 1.378
be employed as supporting learning environment. People use Facebook as a communication tool as instant communication is very important in today's world. As mobile device (smartphone, tablets, wearable etc.) ownership increases, it is becoming easier for people to share information via social networks, and this may affect their popularity online. Moreover, students are following news and get opinions about current trends. Students reflect their mood using social networks which can be understood from their updates. In this way, they frequently update their information and are able to follow what is popular and act accordingly. They use Facebook for entertainment, sharing songs and also following specific friends who have the same interests. Students are aware of what bad behaviour is on Facebook, which is a good sign. It could be argued that they have confidence as their profile picture is alone and have indicated that nice comments increase their confidence. Participants know how to control their privacy settings, are conscious about their privacy, and do not make public shares in order to receive more likes. In addition, negative comments do not upset them, which means they are not directly affected by comments in the virtual environment. They do not change their profile picture in order to get attention, and video related activities (sharing trailers or updating their own videos) are not popular. Moreover, Facebook is not frequently used to find popular places. Furthermore, it is mentioned that students with high Facebook engagement show more participation in university activities, which can be a preparation step for their bachelor studies. On the other hand, use of Facebook for educational purposes can decrease student concentration as their shares changes according to their mood. This shows that participation of students will be low if something affects their mood. A high degree of Facebook sharing might indicate that there are some indications of narcissism. Nevertheless, it appears that Facebook and other social networks (YouTube, Instagram) are highly used among students and there is chance that these platforms can be used as a supporting learning environment, as long as psychological and other considerations are made. As there are indications of narcissism and selfesteem, the impact of these and social media use of students can further be studied. It is also mentioned that the highest use of Facebook is between 18 and 24 years old, which can be further studied to observe attitudes of Facebook use of university students. In addition, as there is high use of WhatsApp and Viber within students, there is an opportunity to carry out a study on the effect of these communication tools. Ortigosa, Carro, et al. (2014) and Ortigosa, Martín, et al. (2014) constructed a new method where
sentiment analysis of students was undertaken. Adaptation of a similar method for WhatsApp/Viber will be useful to track student emotion/mood and determine e-learning process accordingly. References Astin, A. (1984). Student involvement: a developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25(4), 297e308. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachements as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497e529. Blight, M. G., Jagiello, K., & Ruppel, E. K. (2015). “Same stuff different day:” a mixedmethod study of support seeking on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 366e373. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.029. Brenner, J. (2013). Pew Internet: Social networking (full detail). http://pewinternet. org/Commentary/2012/March/Pew-Internet-Social-Networking-full-detail. aspx. Retrieved 4.06.15. Bright, L. F., Kleiser, S. B., & Grau, S. L. (2015). Too much Facebook? an exploratory examination of social media fatigue. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 148e155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.048. rka, a., & Pantic, I. (2015). Internet use, Facebook intrusion, and Błachnio, a., Przepio depression: results of a cross-sectional study. European Psychiatry, 2e5. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2015.04.002. Cadavieco, J. F., Goul~ ao, M. D. F., & Costales, A. F. (2012). Using augmented reality and m-learning to optimize students performance in higher education. Procedia e Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 2970e2977. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.sbspro.2012.05.599. Crnovrsanin, T., Muelder, C. W., Faris, R., Felmlee, D., & Ma, K. L. (2014). Visualization techniques for categorical analysis of social networks with multiple edge sets. Social Networks, 37(1), 56e64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2013.12.002. D'Onfro, J. (2015). Facebook's WhatsApp hits another major milestone. http://www. businessinsider.com/whatsapp-900-million-2015-9. Retrieved 5.09.15. Dessler, G. (2008). Human resource management (11th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd. Eftekhar, A., Fullwood, C., & Morris, N. (2014). Capturing personality from Facebook photos and photo-related activities: how much exposure do you need? Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 162e170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.chb.2014.04.048. Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends:” social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143e1168. Facebook. (2015). Stats. http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/. Retrieved 21.08.15. Fill, C. (2011). Essentials of marketing communications. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Grieve, R., & Kemp, N. (2015). Individual differences predicting social connectedness derived from Facebook: some unexpected findings. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 239e243. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.034. Gross, D. (2009). Dictionary word of the year: 'Unfriend'. http://edition.cnn.com/ 2009/TECH/11/17/unfriend.word/. Retrieved 10.06.15. Grosseck, G., & Holotescu, C. (2011). Teacher education in 140 characters e microblogging implications for continuous education, training, learning and personal development. Procedia e Social and Behavioral Sciences, 11, 160e164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.01.053. Horrigan, J. (2009). Wireless internet use. http://www.pewinternet.org/2009/07/22/ wireless-internet-use/. Retrieved 20.07.15. Instagram. (2015). Stats. https://instagram.com/press/. Retrieved 20.08.15. Junco, R. (2012). The relationship between frequency of Facebook use, participation
T. Kaya, H. Bicen / Computers in Human Behavior 59 (2016) 374e379 in Facebook activities, and student engagement. Computers and Education, 58(1), 162e171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.004. Junco, R. (2015). Student class standing, Facebook use, and academic performance. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 36, 18e29. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.appdev.2014.11.001. Junco, R., Merson, D., & Salter, D. W. (2010). The effect of gender, ethnicity, and income on college students' use of communication technologies. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 13(6), 619e627. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1089/cyber.2009.0357. Kauten, R. L., Lui, J. H. L., Stary, A. K., & Barry, C. T. (2015). “Purging my friends list. Good luck making the cut”: perceptions of narcissism on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 244e254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.010. Kimball, B. L., & Rheingold, H. (2003). How online social networks benefit organizations. Drosophila Information Service (Vol. 38). Krasnova, H., Hildebrand, T., Guenther, O., Kovrigin, A., & Nowobilska, A. (2008). ECIS 2008 proceedings. Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2008/33/. Lee, E., Ahn, J., & Kim, Y. J. (2014). Personality traits and self-presentation at Facebook. Personality and Individual Differences, 69, 162e167. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.paid.2014.05.020. Lee, J. E. R., Moore, D. C., Park, Eun A., & Park, S. G. (2012). Who wants to be “friendrich”? Social compensatory friending on Facebook and the moderating role of public self-consciousness. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 1036e1043. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.01.006. Marshall, T. C., Lefringhausen, K., & Ferenczi, N. (2015). The Big Five, self-esteem, and narcissism as predictors of the topics people write about in Facebook status updates. Personality and Individual Differences, 85, 35e40. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.04.039. Matney, M., & Borland, K. (2009). Facebook, blogs, tweets: How staff and units can use social networking to enhance student learning. Seattle, WA: In the National Association for Student Personnel Administrators. Mazer, J. P., Murphy, R. E., & Simonds, C. J. (2007). I’ll see you on Facebook: the effects of computer-mediated teacher self-disclosure on student motivation, affective learning and classroom climate. Communication Education, 56, 1e17. Meltzer, T., & Philips, S. (2009). From the first email to the first YouTube video: A definitive internet history. http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/oct/23/ internet-history. Retrieved 5.06.15. Mollenhorst, G., Volker, B., & Flap, H. (2014). Changes in personal relationships: how social contexts affect the emergence and discontinuation of relationships. Social Networks, 37(1), 65e80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2013.12.003. Moran, M., Seaman, J., & Tinti-Kane, H. (2011). Teaching, learning, and sharing: How today's higher education faculty use social Media. Babson Survey Research Group. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id¼ED535130. Morriss-Kay, G. M. (2009). ‘The evolution of human artistic creativity’. Journal of Anatomy, 216(2), 158e176. Nadkarni, A., & Hofmann, S. G. (2012). Why do people use Facebook? Personality and Individual Differences, 52(3), 243e249. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.paid.2011.11.007. Ortigosa, A., Carro, R. M., & Quiroga, J. I. (2014). Predicting user personality by mining social interactions in Facebook. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 80(1), 57e71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcss.2013.03.008. Ortigosa, A., Martín, J. M., & Carro, R. M. (2014). Sentiment analysis in Facebook and its application to e-learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 31(1), 527e541. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.05.024.
379
Pachal, P. (2014). What's WhatsApp and why did Facebook pay $16 billion for it?. http://mashable.com/2014/02/19/whatsapp-facebook-why/. Retrieved 15.08.15. Pearse, D. (2012). Facebook's 'dark side': Study finds link to socially aggressive narcissism. http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/mar/17/facebookdark-side-study-aggressive-narcissism. Retrieved 5.06.15. Peluchette, J., & Karl, K. (2010). Examining students' intended image on Facebook: ‘what were they thinking?!’. Journal of Education for Business, 85(1), 30e37. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. From on the Horizon, 9(5), 1e6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816. Roblyer, M. D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, J. V. (2010). Findings on Facebook in higher education: a comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 134e140. Sachoff, M. (2009). Survey finds Facebook most popular communication tool, email still important to most consumers. http://www.webpronews.com/survey-findsfacebook-most-popular-communication-tool-2009-12. Retrieved 1.06.15. Seidman, G. (2013). Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: how personality influences social media use and motivations. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(3), 402e407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.10.009. Statista. (2015). Number of monthly active WhatsApp users worldwide from April 2013 to April 2015 (in millions). http://www.statista.com/statistics/260819/numberof-monthly-active-whatsapp-users/. Retrieved 21.08.15. Tandoc, E. C., Ferrucci, P., & Duffy, M. (2015). Facebook use, envy, and depression among college students: Is facebooking depressing? Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 139e146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.053. Taylor, S., Young, A., & Noronha, A. (2012). What do consumers want from Wi-Fi? insights from Cisco IBSG consumer research. http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ ac79/docs/sp/SP_Wi-Fi_Consumers.pdfaylo. Retrieved 2.06.15. Tobi, S., Ma’on, S., & Ghazali, N. (2013). The use of online social networking and quality of life. In Technology, informatics, management, engineering, and environment (TIME-E), 2013 international conference on (pp. 131e135). Turban, E., King, D., & Lang, J. (2012). Introduction to electronic Commerce (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education Limited. Winter, S., Neubaum, G., Eimler, S. C., Gordon, V., Theil, J., Herrmann, J., et al. (2014). Another brick in the Facebook wall e how personality traits relate to the content of status updates. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 194e202. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.048. Wu, Y. C. J., Chang, W. H., & Yuan, C. H. (2015). Do Facebook profile pictures reflect user's personality? Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 880e889. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.014. Wu, H., & Lo, W. (2014). Why do you want to do “like”, “comment” or “share” on Facebook: the study of antecedent on Facebook user's behavioral intentions. Marketing Review, 11(2), 107e131. YouTube. (2015). Statistics. https://www.youtube.com/yt/press/en-GB/. Retrieved 20.08.15. Zhang, X., Gao, Y., Yan, X., de Pablos, P. O., Sun, Y., & Cao, X. (2015). From e-learning to social-learning: mapping development of studies on social media-supported knowledge management. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 803e811. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.084. Zhang, X., Zhu, H., & de Pablos, P. O. (2012). The impact of second life on team learning outcomes from the perspective of it capabilities. International Journal of Engineering Education, 28(6), 1388e1392.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Computers in Human Behavior journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh
Full length article
The effects of social media on students’ behaviors; Facebook as a case study Tugberk Kaya a, *, Huseyin Bicen b a b
Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Near East University, North Cyprus, Via Mersin 10, Turkey Ataturk Faculty of Education, Near East University, North Cyprus, Via Mersin 10, Turkey
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history: Received 17 September 2015 Received in revised form 27 November 2015 Accepted 9 February 2016 Available online xxx
Social networks are one of the most used communication methods of today's world. Their use in different fields has been examined in several research studies. This study aims to examine the effects of social media on student's behaviors which will mainly focus on Facebook. Whether there is a positive relationship between confidence, social media participation and social media related behaviors will also be assed with regard to using Facebook. In order to collect the primary data, a general scanning model was used to observe attitudes of high school students. The participants chosen were 362 high school students from level 9 to 12. The findings highlight that Facebook is used for communication entertainment and sharing news, pictures and songs. In addition, their Facebook profile picture is alone and students were aware that swearing is considered a form of misconduct, which is a good sign. The study also indicates that students were aware of protecting their social identity as their Facebook shares are not public. Furthermore, they respect privacy as they do not use their friend's Facebook account. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Social networks Facebook Attitudes Behaviors High school students
1. Introduction The first known communication tool/technique was the cave painting. Communication through cave paintings was a very important part of early human society (Morriss-Kay, 2009). While the importance of communication continues, the worldwide penetration of computers and the Internet has resulted online mediums where people can communicate. Classmates.com was the first social networking site, founded in 1995 (Meltzer & Philips, 2009). Nowadays, social networking sites give users a form of online identity. The world's largest social network, Facebook, has more than 1.31 billion mobile active users and 1.49 billion monthly active users (Facebook, 2015). Furthermore, recent studies show that 90% of 18e29 year olds in USA use social networks and a high percentage (between 85 and 99%) of students use Facebook (Brenner, 2013; Matney & Borland, 2009). Facebook use and multitasking showed a significant difference and impact on GPA within different levels of undergraduate students in the USA (Junco, 2015). The term “unfriend” was added to the Oxford Dictionary, defined as “To remove someone as a ‘friend’ on a social networking
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ90 392 675 10 00x3104. E-mail address: [email protected] (T. Kaya). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.036 0747-5632/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
site such as Facebook” (Gross, 2009). For that reason, this research had been carried out in order to observe the attitudes and Facebook usage of students and to examine behaviors of students on social media, especially Facebook. 1.1. Related research As social media is about interaction, there is also knowledge management process where social-learning concept analysed by Zhang et al. (2015). Learning via virtual world also had been analysed by Zhang, Zhu, and de Pablos (2012). Krasnova, Hildebrand, Guenther, Kovrigin, and Nowobilska (2008) stated that the use of social networks can satisfy esteem as users can present themselves to friends who think similarly and have common interests. Tobi, Ma’on, and Ghazali (2013) mentioned the popularity of online social networks and conducted a study assessing if their use had any impact on the social and psychological health of Malaysian students. The authors suggest that it has a positive effect on the health of the students. Tobi et al. (2013) also further mentioned that this has a positive impact of user confidence. In addition, Kimball and Rheingold (2003) and Krasnova et al. (2008) argued that using social networking sites (e.g. Facebook and MySpace) increases user happiness and can reduce depression if Facebook envy is controlled (Tandoc, Ferrucci, & Duffy, 2015). However, it is also argued that
T. Kaya, H. Bicen / Computers in Human Behavior 59 (2016) 374e379
rka, & social network use can depress people (Błachnio, Przepio Pantic, 2015). Pearse (2012) suggested that people with a high score on the Narcissist Personality Inventory questionnaire change their profile picture more often, which can be an indication that engagement of people with low scores can be lower on Facebook. Wu et al. (2015) conducted a study on Facebook profile pictures and personalities and declared that collaborative learning happens when the user changes their profile picture. The authors stated that users have a tendency to know what is gaining attention among their friends and upload the same style profile picture to reflect the same positive message. Marshall, Lefringhausen, and Ferenczi (2015) also stated that there is a relationship between narcissism and the number of Facebook updates of an individual. Kauten, Lui, Stary, and Barry (2015) further mentioned that narcissism is notable among social media users. Ortigosa, Carro, et al. (2014) and Ortigosa, Martín, et al. (2014) indicated that users use social networks in order to support existing real-world relationships rather than to look for new virtual social relationships. Moran, Seaman, and Tinti-Kane (2011) carried out a study in a faculty which suggested that 77% of respondents have social media engagement, while 60% stated that they use social media in the classroom. Research by Roblyer, McDaniel, Webb, Herman, and Witty (2010) highlighted that students are greatly concerned about their privacy, with only 15% declaring that they feel their privacy is invaded when the faculty encourages Facebook use for education. In addition, it is also stated that use of Facebook for education is interesting for students (Roblyer et al., 2010). Blight, Jagiello, and Ruppel (2015) conducted a study on college students and highlighted the fact that students seek support via Facebook: “There is a positive relationship between using Facebook and forming and maintaining social capital, which is defined as ‘the resources accumulated through the relationships among people’ (Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007, p. 1145 cited in Junco, Merson, & Salter, 2010, p. 162). As Facebook enables self-disclosure, it was also mentioned that Facebook use enables higher levels of learning and increase motivation of students (Mazer, Murphy, & Simonds, 2007). The above shows that there are both pros and cons concerning Facebook and suggests that further studies are required. From the findings above, the importance of engagement was highlighted. The term engagement has various explanations such as “the amount of student learning and development associated with an educational program is directly related to the quality and quantity of student engagement in that program” and “the effectiveness of any educational practice is directly related to the ability of that practice to increase student engagement” (Astin, 1984, cited in Junco, 2012, p. 164). 1.2. Theoretical background As mentioned above, starting from cave paintings, people have always used communication. Communication allows us to form relationships with others, which was defined as “social” level needs by Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (Dessler, 2008). With the advancement of technology, communication has become easier. Nowadays, people can spread their thoughts and opinions with a couple of clicks via social networks. “…the need to belong is a powerful, fundamental, and extremely pervasive motivation” (Baumeister & Leary, 1995, p.497). The importance of belonging can be understood from the previous statement and it is mentioned that social networks satisfy the need of belong of individuals (Krasnova et al., 2008; Seidman, 2013). According to Nadkarni and Hofmann (2012) Facebook is also used for self-presentation while Peluchette and Karl (2010) further mentioned that some students share inappropriate materials on Facebook in order to get the
375
attention of their classmates. Teacher use of Facebook is received to have a positive effect on students where it is argued that it increases their motivation and learning (Mazer et al., 2007). Likewise, there are a variety of studies that have been carried out to demonstrate there is a relationship between Facebook use and individual characteristics ranging from agreeableness to esteem level (Lee, Moore, Park, & Park, 2012; Winter et al., 2014). In addition, Lee, Ahn, and Kim (2014) stated that extroverts use Facebook (status/photo share and using like button) more often than introverts. According to Grieve and Kemp (2015), extraversion and openness are related in the context of Facebook connectedness and Marshall et al. (2015) mentioned that there are more Facebook shares of social activities amongst extroverts. Photo/video sharing and album uploads show significant differences among different personalities (Eftekhar, Fullwood, & Morris, 2014). 2. Purpose of the study This study aims to examine students' behaviors on Facebook. Whether there is a positive relationship between confidence and social media participation will also be assed. The drawbacks of using Facebook will also be discussed in the research. It is expected that this study will be useful to highlight student behaviors on social media, as today's students are “digital natives” who were born with new technology and display excessive social network use (Prensky, 2001). Since the 2000s, there has been worldwide Internet penetration and technological advances such as smartphones with free communication methods (Facebook, WhatsApp, Viber etc.). It is argued that shift in student habits will also cause shifts in their behaviors. The research aims are as follows; 1 Determining the social network use of students 2 To figure out respondents' behaviors among the Facebook use
3. Methods 3.1. Participants In order to gather primary data, 362 high school students were surveyed from Türk Maarif Koleji, Bülent Ecevit Anadolu Lisesi and 20 Temmuz Fen Lisesi. 202 participants were female (56%) and 160 were male (44%). 45 (13%) of the respondents were 15 years old, 65 (18%) were 16 years old and the majority 160 of participants were 17 (44%) and 92 (25%) of the respondents were 18 years old as Table 1 demonstrates. The majority of the participants (f ¼ 138) were studying Mathematics and Science (AS-Level), followed by Turkish and Mathematics (92) and A-Level courses (57). There were also participants from the Arts (41) and Science (34) fields. 3.2. Equipment The questionnaire was prepared by the authors and is composed of 51 positive statements in order to evaluate the confidence level, engagement and the effect of educational studies. A 5 point Likert
Table 1 Age of respondents. Age
(f)
%
15 16 17 18
45 65 160 92
13 18 44 25
376
T. Kaya, H. Bicen / Computers in Human Behavior 59 (2016) 374e379
scale was used, where reliability and validity was calculated by the Cronbach's alpha value, which was 0.88 for the whole scale yet some of the respondents might respond unreasonably therefore the research can contain some limitation. 3.3. Data analysis T-test, one way ANOVA and mean statistics were calculated by using IBM SPSS Statistics 20 programme in order to observe the students’ behaviours on social media. 4. Results & discussion 4.1. Social network use of the respondents The majority of the participants (f ¼ 315) have smartphones (87%) while 47 of them do not have any kind of smartphone (13%). Android (f ¼ 171) was the most used Operating System (47%), followed by iOS (f ¼ 139, %39). There was also a small number of Windows (f ¼ 5) users where f ¼ 47 of the students answered “None” to the question “What is the operating system of your mobile device?”, which also clarifies that the number do not have any kind of smartphone. 247 (68%) of the students said that they have an Internet package on their mobile whereas 115 (32%) said they do not have any such package. It is argued that this might be due to the availability of Wi-Fi hotspots in the majority of the public places (Horrigan, 2009; Taylor, Young, & Noronha, 2012). As it can be seen from Table 2, the authors argue that high Facebook use (f ¼ 356) might be due to the lifestyle of participants. Recent research shows that narcissistic people update their Facebook status more often, which supports the authors' assertion (Pearse, 2012; Winter et al., 2014). YouTube (f ¼ 307) and Instagram (f ¼ 250) were among the most used social networks, which was not surprising as YouTube has more than 1 billion users with 300 h of video uploaded every minute and Instagram has 300 million monthly active users and 70 million photograph/video uploaded daily (YouTube, 2015; Instagram, 2015). This indicates that YouTube can also be a channel for supporting education in which teachers have the chance of either finding supportive videos or uploading videos themselves. Likewise, module/class information can be shared on Instagram. As visualisation is effective for education ~o, & Costales, 2012; Crnovrsanin, Muelder, Faris, (Cadavieco, Goula Felmlee, & Ma, 2014), Authors of this paper argues that using channels that students prefer will be effective to support their education. Fill (2011) argued that effective dialogue happens when people have been contacted from their preferred medium of choice. High WhatsApp (f ¼ 280) use is also understandable as it is an instant messaging service providing free messaging (Pachal, 2014).
Table 2 Social Network Use of respondents. Social network
(f)
%
Facebook YouTube WhatsApp Instagram Foursquare (Swarm) Viber Twitter Snapchat Googleþ Askfm Tumblr Tango Vine
356 307 280 250 247 212 146 140 138 82 74 67 40
98 85 77 69 68 59 40 39 38 23 20 19 11
The application had 900 million active users by September 2015 who contributed 64 billion messages per day (D'Onfro, 2015; Statista, 2015). This application could be used for instant notification for students if there is a schedule change or a class dismissal. Twitter was one of the least used social networks among students (f ¼ 146), which is not a good sign as previous research showed that it can be effective for life-learning education of the students (Grosseck & Holotescu, 2011). Nevertheless, as 38% of the students were using Twitter, this still indicates that this social network can be used for further studies although student preferences within the social network must be taken into consideration. In addition to Twitter, low Google þ use (f ¼ 138) was not surprising as it is not a common social network used by students. It is advised that teachers must not have interaction with their students through their private social networks, they can participate via schools' groups on social media. It is argued that social networks will be ever more connected in the future, and thus it will be advantageous if social network accounts of schools or modules were connected. 4.2. Highest and least ranked statements of respondents The highest and lowest ranked statements given by the results are shown below; 4.2.1. Highest ranked statements As highlighted by Table 3, statement H1, “I communicate by Facebook” was the highest ranked choice (M: 3.98), which was not surprising as Facebook is one of the most used communication platforms (Sachoff, 2009; Wu & Lo, 2014). Statement H2, “I share pictures on Facebook” was the second highest choice (M: 3.85), which is a decent indication that the lecture notes should include pictures, as visualisation is effective for the effective learning of students (Cadavieco et al., 2012; Crnovrsanin et al., 2014). If pictures are used, it may trigger sharing of lecture notes via social networks which may support learning of students. High Facebook sharing can be interpreted as an indication of narcissism (Pearse, 2012; Marshall et al., 2015). Statement H3, “I follow news on Facebook” was the third highest choice, which demonstrates that students can follow school news and information updates from Facebook. Statement H4, “Content I share changes according to my mood” received (M: 3.56). From this statement it can be understood that there is a risk of low engagement in lectures if students see something that can affect their mood on Facebook. Statement H10, “I know that swearing on Facebook is a form of misconduct (is not legal)” was in the highest 10 (M: 3.24), which is a good sign indicating that students will act according to the school rules and regulations. In addition, there is also a risk that shy students might not engage in Facebook, if the network will be used as supportive learning environment where it is seen from the Statement H8 “My profile picture is alone” was the 8th highest ranked choice (M ¼ 3.33) among the 51 statements, showing that there may be an indication of narcissism. Nevertheless, the highest 10 statements indicate that students have a high tendency to share content (e.g. pictures, songs, news, videos) on Facebook and have high use for communication which indicates their engagement within the social network is high. This also supports the 98% use statistics amongst social networks. “Nice picture comments increase my confidence” is among the highest ranked statements. Along the same lines, Bright, Kleiser, and Grau (2015) indicated that confidence decreases social media fatigue. Thus, it could be mentioned that participants do have a significant confidence as they extensively use Facebook. “My profile picture is up to date” is also the highest ranked statement. In addition to this, students frequently share content which can be interpreted that they are following recent styles and trends
T. Kaya, H. Bicen / Computers in Human Behavior 59 (2016) 374e379
377
Table 3 Highest ranked statements. Statement
Mean
Std.
H1 e I communicate by Facebook. H2 e I share pictures on Facebook H3 e I follow news on Facebook. H4 e Content I share changes according to my mood. H5 e I follow specific friends on Facebook. H6 e I use Facebook just for fun. H7 e I share songs on Facebook. H8 e My profile picture is alone H9 e I share news on Facebook. H10 e I know that swearing on Facebook is a form of misconduct (is not legal). H11 e I share videos on Facebook. H12 e I follow specific brands/products on Facebook. H13 e I check in places regularly on Facebook. H14 e Nice picture comments increase my confidence. H15 e My profile picture is up to date. H16 e My other social network accounts are connected with Facebook. H17 e I use Facebook in order to meet with new people.
3.98 3.85 3.65 3.56 3.55 3.53 3.43 3.33 3.26 3.24 3.24 3.15 3.02 3.01 3.01 2.85 2.81
1.034 1.094 1.191 1.405 1.258 1.193 1.355 1.405 1.337 1.531 1.36 1.296 1.326 1.287 1.334 1.464 1.31
and act accordingly, supported by the findings of Wu et al. (2015). “I use Facebook in order to meet with new people” is amongst the highest ranked statements, which contradicts the findings of Ortigosa, Carro, et al. (2014) and Ortigosa, Martín, et al. (2014).
4.2.2. Least ranked statements Table 4 indicates that “I use my friends’ Facebook account” (M: 1.64) and “My privacy settings are public in order to get more likes” (M: 1.61) received low scores, which may ensure that the security and confidentiality problems are minimal (Turban, King, & Lang, 2012). This result contradicts the findings of Roblyer et al. (2010) in which 15% of participants mentioned that they feel their privacy is invaded. It can be argued that students who had participated in this research are aware of privacy issues and they prefer to keep their shares limited to Facebook friends. “I use Facebook in order to gossip” (M: 1.66) and “I fool/deceive people on Facebook” also received low scores (M: 1.51) on the questionnaire. This is encouraging as it ensures that one to one arguments will not arise or kept minimal on Facebook. Enabling a peaceful social network environment is important as otherwise relationships can be damaged between students (Mollenhorst, Volker, & Flap, 2014). Surprisingly “I change my profile picture in order to get attention” was one of the least ranked choices, contradicting the findings of Wu et al. (2015).
4.3. Medium ranked statements Table 5 indicates that participants do not usually play games, share trailers and their own videos or use Facebook to find popular places either. In spite of “Nice picture comments increase my confidence” (M: 3.01) being 14th and in the highest ranked statements, “My Facebook use increases my confidence” (M: 2.38) was 29th answer, which shows that Facebook use did not affect the confidence of the participants. There was no indication of depression as “I feel isolated when I cannot login to Facebook” (M: 2.14) and “Negative picture comments depress me” scored (M: 1.93).
5. Conclusion and future studies In this research it is argued that Facebook will be an alternative for communication of students. It is also highlighted that as smartphone ownership is high (87%), students are digital natives and have access to Wi-Fi, it is easy to communicate via Facebook. Along the same lines, Facebook can also be used as a communication medium for consulting students after school hours. They can open conversation groups for their modules or related homework/ projects. By this approach, students will become able to communicate both with classmates and teachers. A fast and effective communication method will also enable after class help when it is required. This shows that, there is an opportunity for Facebook to
Table 4 Least ranked statements. Statement
Mean
Std.
L17 e I start up new debates by Facebook. L16 e My privacy settings are public in order to get more likes. L15 e I use Facebook for Politics. L14 e Negative picture comments depress me. L13 e I share my Facebook password with my friends. L12 e I accept every friend request. L11 e I change my profile picture in order to get attention. L10 e I use Facebook in order to gossip. L9 e I use my friends' Facebook account. L8 e I use Facebook in order to get attention. L7 e My privacy settings are public in order to get more likes. L6 e I fool/deceive people on Facebook. L5 e My profile picture is a famous person. L4 e I can buy Likes on Facebook. L3 e I can buy followers on Twitter. L2 e I update my relationship status instantly in order to get attention. L1 e I can buy Retweets on Twitter.
2.01 1.99 1.98 1.93 1.81 1.76 1.70 1.66 1.64 1.61 1.61 1.51 1.44 1.37 1.35 1.34 1.31
1.205 1.153 1.17 1.119 1.245 1.124 1.063 1.125 1.111 1.042 1.042 1.082 1.003 .945 .887 .910 .832
378
T. Kaya, H. Bicen / Computers in Human Behavior 59 (2016) 374e379
Table 5 Medium ranked statements. Statement
Mean
Std.
M1 e I follow famous people on Facebook. M2 e My details are up to date. M3 e I change my privacy according to closeness. M4 e My profile picture is with my friends. M5 e I check Facebook but I do not like or comment on the content that people share. M6 e I change my profile picture regularly. M7 e I check my previous partners' Facebook profile. M8 e I share trailers on Facebook. M9 e I share my own videos on Facebook. M10 e I play games on Facebook. M11 e I use Facebook in order to find out popular places. M12 e My Facebook use increases my confidence. M13 e I generate new ideas by Facebook. M14 e I use Facebook in order to check mutual friends. M15 e I become upset if I do not receive any likes or comments on my status/pictures or content that I had share. M16 e I feel isolated when I cannot login to Facebook. M17 e I accept friend request according to the gender.
2.78 2.73 2.71 2.71 2.64 2.64 2.53 2.51 2.49 2.47 2.42 2.38 2.36 2.27 2.24 2.14 2.11
1.421 1.3 1.375 1.34 1.197 1.202 1.494 1.361 1.355 1.418 1.285 1.131 1.302 1.203 1.259 1.219 1.378
be employed as supporting learning environment. People use Facebook as a communication tool as instant communication is very important in today's world. As mobile device (smartphone, tablets, wearable etc.) ownership increases, it is becoming easier for people to share information via social networks, and this may affect their popularity online. Moreover, students are following news and get opinions about current trends. Students reflect their mood using social networks which can be understood from their updates. In this way, they frequently update their information and are able to follow what is popular and act accordingly. They use Facebook for entertainment, sharing songs and also following specific friends who have the same interests. Students are aware of what bad behaviour is on Facebook, which is a good sign. It could be argued that they have confidence as their profile picture is alone and have indicated that nice comments increase their confidence. Participants know how to control their privacy settings, are conscious about their privacy, and do not make public shares in order to receive more likes. In addition, negative comments do not upset them, which means they are not directly affected by comments in the virtual environment. They do not change their profile picture in order to get attention, and video related activities (sharing trailers or updating their own videos) are not popular. Moreover, Facebook is not frequently used to find popular places. Furthermore, it is mentioned that students with high Facebook engagement show more participation in university activities, which can be a preparation step for their bachelor studies. On the other hand, use of Facebook for educational purposes can decrease student concentration as their shares changes according to their mood. This shows that participation of students will be low if something affects their mood. A high degree of Facebook sharing might indicate that there are some indications of narcissism. Nevertheless, it appears that Facebook and other social networks (YouTube, Instagram) are highly used among students and there is chance that these platforms can be used as a supporting learning environment, as long as psychological and other considerations are made. As there are indications of narcissism and selfesteem, the impact of these and social media use of students can further be studied. It is also mentioned that the highest use of Facebook is between 18 and 24 years old, which can be further studied to observe attitudes of Facebook use of university students. In addition, as there is high use of WhatsApp and Viber within students, there is an opportunity to carry out a study on the effect of these communication tools. Ortigosa, Carro, et al. (2014) and Ortigosa, Martín, et al. (2014) constructed a new method where
sentiment analysis of students was undertaken. Adaptation of a similar method for WhatsApp/Viber will be useful to track student emotion/mood and determine e-learning process accordingly. References Astin, A. (1984). Student involvement: a developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25(4), 297e308. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachements as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497e529. Blight, M. G., Jagiello, K., & Ruppel, E. K. (2015). “Same stuff different day:” a mixedmethod study of support seeking on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 366e373. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.029. Brenner, J. (2013). Pew Internet: Social networking (full detail). http://pewinternet. org/Commentary/2012/March/Pew-Internet-Social-Networking-full-detail. aspx. Retrieved 4.06.15. Bright, L. F., Kleiser, S. B., & Grau, S. L. (2015). Too much Facebook? an exploratory examination of social media fatigue. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 148e155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.048. rka, a., & Pantic, I. (2015). Internet use, Facebook intrusion, and Błachnio, a., Przepio depression: results of a cross-sectional study. European Psychiatry, 2e5. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2015.04.002. Cadavieco, J. F., Goul~ ao, M. D. F., & Costales, A. F. (2012). Using augmented reality and m-learning to optimize students performance in higher education. Procedia e Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 2970e2977. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.sbspro.2012.05.599. Crnovrsanin, T., Muelder, C. W., Faris, R., Felmlee, D., & Ma, K. L. (2014). Visualization techniques for categorical analysis of social networks with multiple edge sets. Social Networks, 37(1), 56e64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2013.12.002. D'Onfro, J. (2015). Facebook's WhatsApp hits another major milestone. http://www. businessinsider.com/whatsapp-900-million-2015-9. Retrieved 5.09.15. Dessler, G. (2008). Human resource management (11th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd. Eftekhar, A., Fullwood, C., & Morris, N. (2014). Capturing personality from Facebook photos and photo-related activities: how much exposure do you need? Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 162e170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.chb.2014.04.048. Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends:” social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143e1168. Facebook. (2015). Stats. http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/. Retrieved 21.08.15. Fill, C. (2011). Essentials of marketing communications. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Grieve, R., & Kemp, N. (2015). Individual differences predicting social connectedness derived from Facebook: some unexpected findings. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 239e243. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.034. Gross, D. (2009). Dictionary word of the year: 'Unfriend'. http://edition.cnn.com/ 2009/TECH/11/17/unfriend.word/. Retrieved 10.06.15. Grosseck, G., & Holotescu, C. (2011). Teacher education in 140 characters e microblogging implications for continuous education, training, learning and personal development. Procedia e Social and Behavioral Sciences, 11, 160e164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.01.053. Horrigan, J. (2009). Wireless internet use. http://www.pewinternet.org/2009/07/22/ wireless-internet-use/. Retrieved 20.07.15. Instagram. (2015). Stats. https://instagram.com/press/. Retrieved 20.08.15. Junco, R. (2012). The relationship between frequency of Facebook use, participation
T. Kaya, H. Bicen / Computers in Human Behavior 59 (2016) 374e379 in Facebook activities, and student engagement. Computers and Education, 58(1), 162e171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.004. Junco, R. (2015). Student class standing, Facebook use, and academic performance. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 36, 18e29. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.appdev.2014.11.001. Junco, R., Merson, D., & Salter, D. W. (2010). The effect of gender, ethnicity, and income on college students' use of communication technologies. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 13(6), 619e627. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1089/cyber.2009.0357. Kauten, R. L., Lui, J. H. L., Stary, A. K., & Barry, C. T. (2015). “Purging my friends list. Good luck making the cut”: perceptions of narcissism on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 244e254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.010. Kimball, B. L., & Rheingold, H. (2003). How online social networks benefit organizations. Drosophila Information Service (Vol. 38). Krasnova, H., Hildebrand, T., Guenther, O., Kovrigin, A., & Nowobilska, A. (2008). ECIS 2008 proceedings. Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2008/33/. Lee, E., Ahn, J., & Kim, Y. J. (2014). Personality traits and self-presentation at Facebook. Personality and Individual Differences, 69, 162e167. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.paid.2014.05.020. Lee, J. E. R., Moore, D. C., Park, Eun A., & Park, S. G. (2012). Who wants to be “friendrich”? Social compensatory friending on Facebook and the moderating role of public self-consciousness. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 1036e1043. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.01.006. Marshall, T. C., Lefringhausen, K., & Ferenczi, N. (2015). The Big Five, self-esteem, and narcissism as predictors of the topics people write about in Facebook status updates. Personality and Individual Differences, 85, 35e40. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.04.039. Matney, M., & Borland, K. (2009). Facebook, blogs, tweets: How staff and units can use social networking to enhance student learning. Seattle, WA: In the National Association for Student Personnel Administrators. Mazer, J. P., Murphy, R. E., & Simonds, C. J. (2007). I’ll see you on Facebook: the effects of computer-mediated teacher self-disclosure on student motivation, affective learning and classroom climate. Communication Education, 56, 1e17. Meltzer, T., & Philips, S. (2009). From the first email to the first YouTube video: A definitive internet history. http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/oct/23/ internet-history. Retrieved 5.06.15. Mollenhorst, G., Volker, B., & Flap, H. (2014). Changes in personal relationships: how social contexts affect the emergence and discontinuation of relationships. Social Networks, 37(1), 65e80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2013.12.003. Moran, M., Seaman, J., & Tinti-Kane, H. (2011). Teaching, learning, and sharing: How today's higher education faculty use social Media. Babson Survey Research Group. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id¼ED535130. Morriss-Kay, G. M. (2009). ‘The evolution of human artistic creativity’. Journal of Anatomy, 216(2), 158e176. Nadkarni, A., & Hofmann, S. G. (2012). Why do people use Facebook? Personality and Individual Differences, 52(3), 243e249. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.paid.2011.11.007. Ortigosa, A., Carro, R. M., & Quiroga, J. I. (2014). Predicting user personality by mining social interactions in Facebook. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 80(1), 57e71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcss.2013.03.008. Ortigosa, A., Martín, J. M., & Carro, R. M. (2014). Sentiment analysis in Facebook and its application to e-learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 31(1), 527e541. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.05.024.
379
Pachal, P. (2014). What's WhatsApp and why did Facebook pay $16 billion for it?. http://mashable.com/2014/02/19/whatsapp-facebook-why/. Retrieved 15.08.15. Pearse, D. (2012). Facebook's 'dark side': Study finds link to socially aggressive narcissism. http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/mar/17/facebookdark-side-study-aggressive-narcissism. Retrieved 5.06.15. Peluchette, J., & Karl, K. (2010). Examining students' intended image on Facebook: ‘what were they thinking?!’. Journal of Education for Business, 85(1), 30e37. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. From on the Horizon, 9(5), 1e6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816. Roblyer, M. D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, J. V. (2010). Findings on Facebook in higher education: a comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 134e140. Sachoff, M. (2009). Survey finds Facebook most popular communication tool, email still important to most consumers. http://www.webpronews.com/survey-findsfacebook-most-popular-communication-tool-2009-12. Retrieved 1.06.15. Seidman, G. (2013). Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: how personality influences social media use and motivations. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(3), 402e407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.10.009. Statista. (2015). Number of monthly active WhatsApp users worldwide from April 2013 to April 2015 (in millions). http://www.statista.com/statistics/260819/numberof-monthly-active-whatsapp-users/. Retrieved 21.08.15. Tandoc, E. C., Ferrucci, P., & Duffy, M. (2015). Facebook use, envy, and depression among college students: Is facebooking depressing? Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 139e146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.053. Taylor, S., Young, A., & Noronha, A. (2012). What do consumers want from Wi-Fi? insights from Cisco IBSG consumer research. http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ ac79/docs/sp/SP_Wi-Fi_Consumers.pdfaylo. Retrieved 2.06.15. Tobi, S., Ma’on, S., & Ghazali, N. (2013). The use of online social networking and quality of life. In Technology, informatics, management, engineering, and environment (TIME-E), 2013 international conference on (pp. 131e135). Turban, E., King, D., & Lang, J. (2012). Introduction to electronic Commerce (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education Limited. Winter, S., Neubaum, G., Eimler, S. C., Gordon, V., Theil, J., Herrmann, J., et al. (2014). Another brick in the Facebook wall e how personality traits relate to the content of status updates. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 194e202. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.048. Wu, Y. C. J., Chang, W. H., & Yuan, C. H. (2015). Do Facebook profile pictures reflect user's personality? Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 880e889. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.014. Wu, H., & Lo, W. (2014). Why do you want to do “like”, “comment” or “share” on Facebook: the study of antecedent on Facebook user's behavioral intentions. Marketing Review, 11(2), 107e131. YouTube. (2015). Statistics. https://www.youtube.com/yt/press/en-GB/. Retrieved 20.08.15. Zhang, X., Gao, Y., Yan, X., de Pablos, P. O., Sun, Y., & Cao, X. (2015). From e-learning to social-learning: mapping development of studies on social media-supported knowledge management. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 803e811. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.084. Zhang, X., Zhu, H., & de Pablos, P. O. (2012). The impact of second life on team learning outcomes from the perspective of it capabilities. International Journal of Engineering Education, 28(6), 1388e1392.