Students' and Teachers' Use of Facebook

Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Computers in Human Behavior

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh
Review
Students and teachers use of Facebook

Khe Foon Hew
National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, 1 Nanyang Walk, Singapore 637616, Singapore
a r t i c l e
i n f o
a b s t r a c t
The purpose of this article is to review current published research studies focusing on the use of Facebook by students and teachers. The aim of the review is not to solely discuss Facebook in relation to teaching or learning purposes, or about its educational value per se, but also to present a detailed account of the participants Facebook usage prole or the extent to which users are engaged in Facebook activities. The emphasis of this review will be upon empirical ndings rather than opinion- or theoretical explanations. Following the review guidelines set by Creswell (Research Design Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 1994), I summarize the hitherto accumulated state of knowledge concerning Facebook and highlight questions or issues that research has left unresolved. This review is organized into three sections that cover the major topics of current research: (a) students Facebook usage prole or extent of Facebook use (e.g., time students spend on Facebook each day, students motives for using Facebook, as well as various factors that may affect these usage proles), (b) the effects of Facebook use (e.g., effects of Facebook self-disclosure on teacher credibility, effects of Facebook use on student social presence and discussion, and effects of Facebook on students academic performance), and (c) students attitudes toward Facebook. The conclusions overall suggest that Facebook thus far has very little educational use, that students use Facebook mainly to keep in touch with known individuals, and that students tend to disclose more personal information about themselves on Facebook; hence attracting potential privacy risks upon themselves. 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Article history: Available online 6 January 2011 Keywords: Facebook Empirical research Review Students Teachers
Contents 1. 2. 3. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Background of Facebook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1. Searching and selection procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2. Data analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1. Students Facebook usage profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1.1. Motives for Facebook use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1.2. Time spent on Facebook. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1.3. Number of friends on Facebook. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1.4. Amount and types of information disclosed on Facebook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1.5. Privacy settings on Facebook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2. Effects of using Facebook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.1. Effects of Facebook self-disclosure on teacher credibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.2. Effects of Facebook use on students online discussion and social presence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.3. Effects of Facebook on students academic performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3. Students attitudes toward Facebook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Discussion and conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix A. Summary of reviewed studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 663 663 664 664 664 664 664 664 665 665 666 666 666 667 667 667 667 667 669 675
4.
5.
Tel.: +65 67903282; fax: +65 68968038.

E-mail address: khefoon.hew@nie.edu.sg 0747-5632/$ - see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.11.020
K.F. Hew / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676
663
1. Introduction Facebook was originally created in February 2004 as a Harvardonly online social networking site but had since opened its site to the general public in 2006 (Sheldon, 2008a; Urista, Dong, & Day, 2009). In December 2006, Facebook had more than 12 million users, and by December 2009, the number of active users increased to 350 million (Facebook, 2009). Facebook is essentially an online social network site in which individuals can share photographs, personal information, and join groups of friends with one another (Buckman, 2005). Although other online sites such as MySpace and Friendster are also designed to connect people, Facebook is generally considered the leading social networking site used by college students (Educause, 2006; Golder, Wilkinson, & Huberman, 2007; Stutzman, 2006). For example, in the USA, the use of Facebook is now nearly ubiquitous among students, with over 90% participation among undergraduate students as reported in some surveys (Ellison, Steineld, & Lampe, 2007; Stutzman, 2006). It has also become one of the most popular social network site used by British students (Madge, Meek, Wellens, & Hooley, 2009). Advocates of Facebook (e.g., Munoz & Towner, 2009) have suggested that Facebook can positively impact a college students life. For example, students can use Facebook to contact other students concerning course assignments, group projects, or teachers contacting their students regarding useful course links. Such suggestions and claims, however, are often made not based on empirical ndings. On the other hand, critics voice their concerns about the possible negative effects of Facebook use. For example, students may post inappropriate pictures of themselves on their Facebook prole. These pictures may jeopardize their chances of future employment should their prole data be mined by potential employers. Others wondered if students who use Facebook spend fewer hours studying which may adversely impact their academic performance (Kirschner & Karpinski, 2010). To the best of my knowledge, no empirical literature review on the use of Facebook by students or teachers has been published hitherto. This review focuses on the use of Facebook by students and teachers. However, the aim is not to solely discuss Facebook in relation to teaching or learning purposes, or about its educational value per se (although this was done in the section on the effects of using Facebook), but also to present a detailed account of the participants Facebook usage prole or the extent to which users are engaged in Facebook activities (such as the amount of time students spend on Facebook in a day and the number of Facebook friends) (Ellison et al., 2007). Doing so will help educational practitioners and researchers to understand the characteristics of the current student Facebook users (Ellison et al., 2007), or to better understand the pervasive use of Facebook among students. This review is signicant in two ways. First, it helps educators to better understand how and why students use this social network site. For example, educators would know if students actually use Facebook for learning purposes as suggested by Facebook advocates, or for other activities unrelated to education. Second, this review provides a summary and critique of the research topics and research methods hitherto used in the study of Facebook. Educators and researchers could use this information to identify unanswered issues or questions in the literature and dene future research directions concerning the use of Facebook. The rest of the article is organized as follows. First, in the background section, I provide a brief description of the features of Facebook. Next, I report how I searched for and selected the relevant empirical studies, as well as how these studies were analyzed in the method section. Finally, the identied research topics and their
related ndings are reported in the results section; this is followed by the discussion and conclusion of the review. 2. Background of Facebook Individuals who wish to use Facebook have to register themselves online and create a prole by using a valid e-mail address (Cain, 2008). According to Lampe, Ellison, and Steineld (2007), the elements of a Facebook prole may be classied into four different categories: control elements, referents elements, preference elements, and contact elements. Control elements include elds such as the gender of the user, length of membership in Facebook, and institutional status. Referents elements are based on prole elds that are related to common points of reference among users such as hometown, high school, residence, and concentration (major eld of study). Preference elements are based on prole elds that express personal interest and self-descriptive information. These elds include the following: About Me, interests, favorite Music, favorite movies, favorite TV shows, favorite books, favorite quotes, and political views. Contact elements contain prole elds that include the following: ofine mailing address, e-mail address, instant messenger screen name, relationship status, and birthday. All users can also upload and change their prole pictures (Lewis, Kaufman, & Christakis, 2008). Once an individual has joined Facebook, he or she can search for anyone and view the other users proles. A Facebook user can also send a message to any other individual to ask if he or she agrees to be Facebook friends (Kolek & Saunders, 2008). Should the request be accepted, each individual would be listed as a friend on the other users Facebook prole in the form of a hyperlink (Kolek & Saunders, 2008). Users can also join groups or become a fan of the pages of their favorite organization, celebrities, football clubs, or food. This allows users with common interest to get together to support the organization or the celebrity. Facebook can also serve as a source of entertainment due to the availability of games and applications. Some examples of Facebook games and applications include Tower Bloxx, Crazy Taxi, Mob Wars, Scratch and Win, My Fairyland, Facebook for iPhone, and Pet Society. There are several ways for users to communicate with one another on Facebook. Users can send private messages to other individuals. This capability is similar to emailing (Pempek, Yermolayeva, & Calvert, 2009), except that messages may only be sent to one recipient at a time (Golder et al., 2007). Messages can be sent to any user even if the sender does not know the recipients e-mail address (Golder et al., 2007). Users can also make use of the Wall function. A Wall is a space on the prole, somewhat like a notice board or a public forum where users can post short messages or add photographs, music or video clips to share information (Ross et al., 2009; West, Lewis, & Currie, 2009). Facebook users can comment on their friends messages, photographs and videos. A user can also use the poke function to indicate an intent or desire to speak to any Facebook user (Ross et al., 2009). According to Golder et al. (2007), pokes appear as a notication on the recipients login page (e.g., You have been poked by John Peters), inviting a return poke. There is also birthday calendar where users could remind other people about someones birthday. This reminder can be seen as a notication found on the right of the users homepage. The events calendar provides a way for individuals to inform and invite their friends to an external event. Users are to rsvp to the event and the calendar would remind the user when the event is coming up. The chat function allows a user to communicate real-time just like instant messenger with his or her Facebook friends. Instant messaging is a text-based communication tool that allows dyadic synchronous interaction between two individuals, although there some systems that support multiparty chat (Nardi, Whittaker, & Bradner,
664
2000). There is also the News Feed function which gives information to the Facebook users friends about certain Facebook activities, or gives the user information about his or her friends activities (Cheung, Chiu, & Lee, 2010; West et al., 2009). 3. Method 3.1. Searching and selection procedure The focus of this research review is limited to the use of Facebook only. Studies that deal with other social networking sites such as MySpace, Bebo, or Piczo (Livingstone, 2008) are excluded. This decision is deemed appropriate because Facebook is currently the most popular online social networking site among students (Cheung, Chiu, & Lee, 2010; Educause, 2006; Golder et al., 2007; Stutzman, 2006). Furthermore, the emphasis of this review will be upon empirical ndings rather than non-empirical explanations. Focusing on empirical studies will help educators and researchers to understand the actual pervasive use of Facebook among students. The search for empirical articles was conducted in two phases. In the rst phase, I searched for empirical-based articles in electronic databases using the keyword Facebook, and open-ended search period. In the second phase, further searches on the papers cited in some of the articles were carried out. The electronic databases used for the literature search included the following: ERIC, Academic Search Premier, Communication and Mass Media Complete, PsycARTICLES, and EdITLib Digital Library for Information Technology and Education. The use of these databases was considered sufcient and reasonable because together they covered more than 10,075 journals. Academic Search Premier is also considered to be one of the most prominent databases in academic institutions (Blessinger & Olle, 2004). As at February 24, 2010, the searches yielded a total of 539 articles. Out of these, 36 were identied for review (see Appendix on pages 2429). Of the 36 articles, 26 papers were based on various forms of self-report data (e.g., questionnaire surveys, interviews), eight papers on content analyses of Facebook contents (e.g., Facebook proles, Wall postings), and two papers on a combination of self-report data and content analyses method. The questionnaire survey was the most commonly used data collection tool. Of the 539 articles, I was not able to locate a published empirical-based article on high school students Facebook use. This suggests that current published research on Facebook focused mainly on college or university students. 3.2. Data analysis The current review follows the guidelines set by Creswell (1994), which stated that the purpose of a review is to summarize the accumulated knowledge base regarding the topic of interest and highlight issues that research has yet to resolve. The actual data analysis progressed as follows. Each individual empirical article was read and summarized using the research question as a guide. The research topic categories were not pre-determined prior to the review but emerged ground-up from the data. Utilizing the constant-comparative method (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), I read the rst article and noted its content to form a tentative research topic category. The ndings of the rst article were also noted. The next article was then selected. I again read it, and noted its content to compare whether it was similar to the rst article. If so, I put the second content into the rst research topic category (together with its related ndings) and went onto the third article. If otherwise, the second content represented the rst entry in a new second category of research
topic. This process was repeated until all the 36 articles were read and examined. It is possible that one single article may yield more than one research topic category. 4. Results The identied research topics appeared to cluster into three main groups: (a) students Facebook usage prole, (b) the effects of using Facebook, and (c) students attitudes toward Facebook. Within these groups, there were other sub-topics, as shown in Table 1. 4.1. Students Facebook usage prole 4.1.1. Motives for Facebook use Nine motives for Facebook use are identied. These include the following: (a) To maintain existing relationships (e.g., send a message to a friend, post a message on my friends wall, stay in touch with friends or people I know, maintain relationships with people you may not get to see very often, nd out what acquaintances or friends are doing now) (Bosch, 2009; Ellison et al., 2007; Joinson, 2008; Lampe, Ellison, & Steineld, 2006, 2008; Lewis & West, 2009; Pempek et al., 2009; Sheldon, 2008a; Stern & Taylor, 2007; Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). (b) To meet new people (e.g., nd information about other people, develop a romantic relationship, nd companionship, meet new friends) (Ellison et al., 2007; Lampe et al., 2006; Sheldon, 2008a; Stern & Taylor, 2007; Urista et al., 2009; Zhao, Grasmuck, & Martin, 2008). (c) Using Facebook is cool, fun (Lewis & West, 2009; Pempek et al., 2009; Sheldon, 2008a). (d) To make oneself more popular (e.g., popularity contest to have more Facebook friends) (Urista et al., 2009). (e) To pass time (e.g., to occupy my time, to pass time when bored, to distract myself, play games or use applications within Facebook) (Joinson, 2008; Pempek et al., 2009; Sheldon, 2008a; Stern & Taylor, 2007). (f) To express or present oneself (e.g., update my own status, prole) (Joinson, 2008; Pempek et al., 2009). (g) For learning purposes (e.g., nd help with school work) (Bosch, 2009; Pempek et al., 2009). For example, in a study involving 50 undergraduate students and ve lecturers at a university in South Africa, Bosch (2009) found that students used Facebook to nd answers to questions about course venues and assignment details through their Facebook friends, to share information or ideas about projects, lecture or study notes, and to inform lecturers which areas or topics
Table 1 List of major Facebook research topics. Topic Facebook usage prole Subtopic Motives for Facebook use Time spent on Facebook Number of friends on Facebook Information disclosed on Facebook Privacy settings on Facebook Effects of Facebook use on students number of discussion posts and social presence Effects of Facebook self-disclosure on teacher credibility Effects of Facebook on students academic performance Satisfaction and dissatisfaction of using Facebook
Effects of using Facebook
Attitudes toward Facebook
665
they would prefer an instructor to cover, hence helping the lecturer to come to class prepared for it. One lecturer used Facebook to communicate or pass important information to students because it was easier and quicker than to look for them in class. Another lecturer felt that Facebook helped students ask questions that they might not feel comfortable doing so in class (e.g., due to shyness). (h) As a task management tool (e.g., store and organize photographs, contact information such as e-mail addresses, phone numbers, birthdates) (Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). (i) For student activism. For example, students used Facebook to provide general information around voter education, as well as enable voters to join particular groups to express their intent to vote for certain election candidates (Bosch, 2009). Of the nine motives, students mainly used Facebook for social interaction, especially to maintain existing relationship. However, this interaction has very little to do with learning or teaching purposes, contrary to popular claims or suggestions that using Facebook helps engage students in their learning. Students reported signicantly more Facebook use involving people with whom they shared an ofine connectioneither an existing friend, a classmate, someone living near them, or someone they met socially rather than meeting new people or strangers (Bosch, 2009; Ellison et al., 2007; Golder et al., 2007; Ophus & Abbitt, 2009; Pempek et al., 2009). Facebook was used most likely to keep in touch with friends from high school, or nd out more about someone with whom they had a previous connection, even if that connection is as weak as sharing a class (Lampe et al., 2006). For example, 97% of 286 students reported that high school friends had seen their prole (Ellison et al., 2007). Facebook was not generally used as a tool to meet new people online. For example, only two of 16 students said that they had made friends with people whom they had not met faceto-face before (Lewis & West, 2009). Most students (77.7% of N = 92) reported that none of their Facebook friends originated online (Pempek et al., 2009). Only 4% of a total of 68,169 Wall postings were related to education-use (Selwyn, 2009). Selwyn (2009) found no signicant difference in terms of education-related Facebook activity by students gender, year of study or assessment marks. The scarcity of education-related Facebook use result is supported by other studies (Kolek & Saunders; Madge et al., 2009; Mazer, Murphy, & Simonds, 2009; Pempek et al., 2009). For example, the mean number of references to learning was only 0.4 (Kolek & Saunders). Finding help with schoolwork (2.17% of 92 students) was rarely mentioned (Pempek et al., 2009), only 10% of 312 undergraduates used Facebook for discussing academic work with other students (e.g., for revision, arranging group or project work) (Madge et al., 2009), and a majority of students (91% of 312) (Madge et al., 2009) and (85.5% of 110) (Ophus & Abbitt, 2009) said that they had never communicated with an academic staff using Facebook. 4.1.2. Time spent on Facebook On the whole, previous research suggests that students primarily spend between 10 and 60 min on Facebook per day (Christodes, Muise, & Desmarais, 2009; Joinson, 2008; Lampe et al., 2006; Muise, Christodes, & Desmarais, 2009; Orr et al., 2009; Pempek et al., 2009; Ross et al., 2009; Sheldon, 2008a; Stern & Taylor, 2007; Valenzuela, Park, & Kee, 2009). For example, a majority of students (79% of 97 students) reported that they spent between 10 and 60 min on Facebook daily (Ross et al., 2009). About 96% of 364 students logged onto Facebook from less than 10 min to 60 min every day (Stern & Taylor, 2007). Participants reported spending an average of 38.93 min on Facebook each day, with female students appearing to spend signicantly more time on the network site than male students (Muise et al., 2009). The nding
about students spending 1060 min using Facebook a day suggests that Facebook does not seem to distract students very much from learning as far as time is concerned. Golder et al. (2007) found that Facebook use was lowest during college student weekend (midFriday to mid-Sunday), presumably when students were away from their computers. This suggests that Facebook use does not represent a leisure time activity but rather an activity that parallels schoolwork and other computer-related activities during the weekdays (Golder et al., 2007). Age was found to be signicantly negatively correlated with Facebook use (Joinson, 2008). Younger users were more likely than older ones to use Facebook (Kolek & Saunders, 2008; Pempek et al., 2009; Valenzuela et al., 2009). For example, 65% of rst year and sophomores students have a Facebook account versus 38.46% of juniors and seniors (Pempek et al., 2009). 4.1.3. Number of friends on Facebook Generally, the results of past studies indicated that students had between 150 and 350 friends on Facebook (Christodes et al., 2009; Ellison et al., 2007; Golder et al., 2007; Lewis & West, 2009; Muise et al., 2009; Sheldon, 2008a). For example, students reported having a mean of 297.07 Facebook friends (Christodes et al., 2009). Most respondents reported having 100200 Facebook friends (Lewis & West, 2009). Majority had between 200 and 350 friends (Sheldon, 2008a). While the term friend on Facebook can reect that users have some form of acquaintance with people whom they have previously known ofine, it can also reect the most supercial type of relationship (i.e., weak ties) since it is common for users to solicit and establish friend status with the most barely acquainted people (boyd, 2006). Only one student reported that her mother was a Facebook friend. The reasons for not wanting older adults, particularly parents, as friends appeared to be related to embarrassment, social norms, and worries about parents being exposed and made vulnerable (West et al., 2009). Facebook friends were generally peers of a similar age (West et al., 2009). Facebook appears to play an important role in helping students form and maintain social capital. According to Ellison et al. (2007), Facebook helps to facilitate this by providing personal information about other people (via the prole pages), making visible a persons commonalities with other individuals, and thus enabling students to identify other students who might be useful in some capacity (e.g., a math major in a required statistics class). What are some possible factors that may correlate with the quantity of Facebook friends? Ross et al. (2009), found no association between extraversion and the number of Facebook friends. Extraversion was dened as an individuals tendency to be sociable (McCrae, 1992; Ross et al., 2009). Ross et al. (2009) postulated that extraverts may nd Facebook lacking in the type of immediate social contact they desire, hence they do not use the site as an alternative to real-world social interactions. Ross et al.s (2009) nding, however, is inconsistent with other empirical studies such as those conducted by Tong, Van Der Heide, Langwell, and Walther (2008) and Acar (2008). Based on a sample of 132 undergraduate students at a university in the USA, Tong et al. (2008) found a curvilinear inverted-U shaped relationship between level of extraversion and number of Facebook friends. Extraversion was conceptualized as how verbose or outgoing the prole owner is. It seems that the greatest degree of extraversion was associated with moderately large numbers of friends, but declined at the greatest numbers. Observers apparently infer that an individual with an excessive number of friends may not have accumulated them as a result of extraversion, but rather by some other characteristic (e.g., popularity contest). The disparity between Tong et al.s (2008) and Ross et al.s (2009) ndings could be due to the use of different instruments
666
to measure extraversion. The former study assessed level of extraversion using measures created by McCroskey, Hamilton, and Weiner (1974), while the latter employed a ve-factor model construed by McCrae (1992). Additionally, in the Tong et al. (2008) study, the level of a prole owners extraversion was perceived and indicated by other users, not by the owner herself and that all proles depicted females only. Acar (2008) also investigated the relationship between individuals tendency to be introverted or extraverted and the number of their Facebook friends. Extroversion was found to be a determinant of number of Facebook friends. A participants tendency to be introverted or extroverted was measured by eight items borrowed from the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Female students reported having signicantly more friends than males (Pempek et al., 2009). One possible explanation is that female students did not differ in their willingness to initiate friendships with both sexes: either with male students or female students (Wang, Moon, Kwon, Evans, & Stefanone, 2010). Male students, however, preferred to initiate friendships with female students (Wang et al., 2010), hence limiting the male students overall number of Facebook friends. Not surprisingly, shyness was signicantly negatively related to the number of Facebook friends (Orr et al., 2009). Shy students reported having fewer Facebook friends than less-shy individuals. Students who were anxious about face-to-face communication tended to have fewer Facebook friends (Sheldon, 2008b). Research also suggests that students who ll in information pertaining to the referents elements of a Facebook prole (e.g., hometown before joining university, high school, on-campus housing information, and major eld of study) tend to have more Facebook friends (Lampe et al., 2007). This suggests that the referents elements are most likely to predict the total number of friends a user has on Facebook. A possible explanation is that information that helps share some common ground (e.g., same high school or hometown, same major, same classes) can provide an immediate establishment of common referents that can foster interaction among Facebook users. From a transaction cost perspective, it reduces the costs for students to search for potentially relevant contacts in Facebook. 4.1.4. Amount and types of information disclosed on Facebook Interestingly, students perceived that they signicantly disclosed more information about themselves (identity revelation) on Facebook than they were in general (e.g., as compared to other means of communication) (Christodes et al., 2009); hence attracting potential privacy risks upon themselves. This information tends to be honest and truthful (Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). Students felt that it was nonsensical to falsify information as such practice would be questioned by their known friends (Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). Students were very likely to post personal information such as birthday (96%), e-mail address (85%), hometown (85%), and relationship status (81%) (Christodes et al., 2009). Young and Quan-Haase (2009) reported that about 99% of 77 undergraduates reported using their actual name in their prole (rst and last name), and nearly two-thirds of respondents indicated their sexual orientation (e.g., if they were interested in men, women, or both), relationship status, and interests (e.g., favorite books, movies and activities), 97.4% posted their school name, 83.1% their e-mail address, 92.2% their birth date, 80.5% their the current city or town in which they live, and almost all respondents reported posting an image of themselves (98.7%) and photos of their friends (96.1%). Similarly, about 90% of 4540 proles contained a picture, 87.8% revealed their birth date (Gross & Acquisti, 2005). Seventy-four percent of 364 students reported that their proles were accurate representations of themselves (Stern & Taylor, 2007).
However, it seems that students refrained from disclosing their ofine contact information (e.g., phone numbers, physical mailing addresses) (Christodes et al., 2009; Zhao et al., 2008). Students were far less likely to post their phone number (24%) and home address (4%) (Christodes et al., 2009). Only 4 out of 63 users provided their complete mailing address on Facebook (Zhao et al., 2008). Few respondents reported disclosing their physical address (7.9%), their cell phone number (10.5%) (Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). Only about 21% of 286 students listed their mobile number in their prole (Ellison et al., 2007). Past research found no association between the frequency of student Facebook use and the amount of information revelation (Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). Interestingly, concern for unwanted Facebook audiences (e.g., current or future employers, university administrators, and corporations) showed no relationship with information revelation (Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). However, personal network size (total number of Facebook friends) was positively associated with student information revelation on Facebook. The larger the students personal network on Facebook was, the more likely the students were to reveal information (Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). The need for popularity was also found to be a signicant predictor of information revelation on Facebook (Christodes et al., 2009). 4.1.5. Privacy settings on Facebook Students can control who can view their Facebook proles by editing their privacy settings (Pempek et al., 2009). According to Gross and Acquisti (2005), for any user on Facebook, there are four different categories of people: friends, friends of friends, nonfriend users of the same network (e.g., at the same institution), and non-friend users at a different network. By default, every individual on Facebook appears in the searches of everyone else, independent of institution afliation (Gross & Acquisti, 2005). A prole is deemed to be private if the student has changed the default setting so that his prole is no longer accessible in full by a nonfriend, same-network user, or the prole is no longer searchable by a non-friend, same-network user (Lewis et al., 2008). In other words, a prole is considered private when the user has taken steps to limit the visibility of his or her prole to strangers (Lewis et al., 2008). Results of previous studies regarding the level of student privacy settings on Facebook appear to be mixed. Some researchers found that students did not bother restricting their prole visibility. For example, only about one-tenth (11%) of 339 students restricted the access to their proles (Kolek & Saunders, 2008), suggesting that the majority used the default setting (i.e., open access to everyone on the site). Most students (61.96% of N = 92) enabled their prole page to be visible to all their networks and all their friends (Pempek et al., 2009). Only 1.2% of 4540 users made use of Facebook privacy settings (Gross & Acquisti, 2005). Results from other studies suggested otherwise. More than half of the respondents in Joinsons (2008) study reported changing the default privacy settings in Facebook to make their prole more private. Sixty-four percent of 77 undergraduates at a Canadian university adjusted the visibility of their prole to their friends only, hence restricting their prole from unknown Facebook users; only 7.9% left their prole open to anyone on Facebook (Young & Quan-Haase, 2009). Research has found that female students are signicantly more likely to have private proles than are male students (Joinson, 2008; Lewis et al., 2008). 4.2. Effects of using Facebook Researchers were also interested to examine if the use of Facebook could affect certain outcomes such as perceived teacher cred-
667
ibility, students discussion performance.
posts,
and students
academic
work) because the information produced in the study was descriptive and correlational. 4.3. Students attitudes toward Facebook Finally, some researchers were interested in examining participants affective domain such as their attitudes and satisfaction of using Facebook. Most of the previous studies relied on self-reported data such as questionnaires or interviews to report the participants affective outcome. For the most part, communicating on Facebook was seen by students as fun and not serious (Lewis & West, 2009). Overall, most students did not encounter negative effects from Facebook use or any inappropriate behavior (e.g., illegal drug use, nudity, partial nudity) on Facebook. The few negative effects typically include information that is revealed or misinterpreted, people trying to communicate with others who are not interested in doing so, and inappropriate messages or photos posted on walls or proles (Stern & Taylor, 2007). Of the 358 respondents, 20% reported that they were stalked on Facebook (constant messaging by an individual) about once or twice per year, and 10% about every month (Stern & Taylor, 2007). Sexually provocative messages and references to alcohol, drugs, or partying were rare (Kolek & Saunders, 2008; Zhao et al., 2008). Watson, Smith, and Driver (2006) found only 14 of 150 photos portrayed in Facebook contained incidences of alcohol consumption, four photos of suggestive or obscene behavior, and one photo involving nudity or partial nudity. No incidences of sexual acts and illegal drug use were discovered. Table 2 summarizes the various ndings that are presented in this paper. 5. Discussion and conclusion The purpose of the paper is to present a review of hitherto published empirical studies focusing on the use of Facebook by students and teachers, with the aim of summarizing the various ndings and indicating future research directions. The conducted review suggests that previous empirical research has focused on one or more of the following topics or themes: (a) students Facebook usage prole (including their motives for using Facebook and identity presentation), (b) students attitudes toward Facebook, and (c) the effects of Facebook on teacher credibility, student social presence, discussion, and academic performance. Overall, previous ndings have found that students spend mostly between 10 and 60 min on Facebook every day with the primary purpose of keeping in touch with people, and that students tend to signicantly disclose more personal information about themselves on Facebook than they would be using other means of communication. Our nding concerning students use of Facebook to mainly maintain links with known people rather than creating new contacts concurs with Ellison et al.s (2007) conclusion in that Facebook represents an ofine to online trend, as opposed to online to ofine where users meet their new online correspondents face-to-face. One possible explanation of students inclination to use Facebook to keep in touch with known individuals is that offered by the Relational Maintenance (RM) theory. RM theory postulates that in order to keep relationships in a stable and satisfactory condition, certain proactive maintenance strategies need to be utilized to help prevent problems that could result in relational dissolution (Dindia & Canary, 1993; Wright, 2004). Canary, Stafford, Hause, and Wallace (1993) formulated a typology that includes six broad maintenance strategies: (a) positivity efforts to make interaction pleasant (e.g., showing affection), (b) openness attempts to keep communication open by engaging in
4.2.1. Effects of Facebook self-disclosure on teacher credibility Mazer et al. (2009) examined the effects of a female teacher self-disclosure (previously unknown to the students) via Facebook on her credibility as perceived by 129 undergraduate students at a university in the USA. The teachers self-disclosure on Facebook was manipulated through photographs, biographical information, and Wall posts in three experimental conditions (high, medium, and low self-disclosures). In the high self-disclosure condition, the teacher provided photographs which showed her in various social settings with friends and family in public locations. Information about favorite books, movie quotes, relationship status, and campus group membership was also offered. Fictitious comments were also posted on the Wall which highlighted the various social gatherings the teacher attended. In the medium self-disclosure condition, the photographs were limited to the teacher with family at home. Information related to favorite movies, books and quotes were given but no Wall comments were made. The low self-disclosure condition featured only a face-shot of the teacher, and information about her position at the university. No comments were made on the Wall. The 129 student participants were randomly assigned to one of the three conditions. Results showed that students tend to attribute higher perceived levels of teacher trustworthiness and teacher caring qualities to a teacher who willingly disclosed more information about herself than one who did not (or in other words a teacher who did not bother restricting her prole accessibility). This nding has implications on the teacher-student relationship, and may consequently affect the teaching and learning climate. However, there was no signicant difference between the high and low disclosure conditions with regard to teacher competence. 4.2.2. Effects of Facebook use on students online discussion and social presence Using a randomized experimental design, DeSchryver, Mishra, Koehleer, and Francis (2009) assigned 16 students to use the built-in Moodle forums (threaded) for discussion. Fifteen students used the Facebook discussion application which listed postings in chronological order. No statistical signicance was found between the Facebook and Moodle discussion groups with regard to the mean number of words per posting, although the mean number was higher in Facebook (201.32, SD = 163.73) than in Moodle (M = 188.64, SD = 154.40). Analysis also showed no statistical signicance between the two groups in terms of perceived social presence. Possible reasons for the latter result include restricting students solely to the use of the discussion application of Facebook which might have diminished the affordances that Facebook has to offer if used in a wholesale manner. Students were also disallowed from becoming Facebook friends with each other. 4.2.3. Effects of Facebook on students academic performance Kirschner and Karpinski (2010) surveyed 102 undergraduate and 117 graduate students at a large Midwestern university in the USA. The researchers found that Facebook users had signicantly lower GPAs (M = 3.06, out of 4.0) compared to non-users (M = 3.82). Facebook users also reported spending fewer hours studying per week (15 h) than the non-users (1115 h). The relationship between Facebook use and GPA and hours spent studying did not appear to depend on whether the participant was an undergraduate or a graduate student. Nor was it dependent on the students major eld of study. However, Kirschner and Karpinski (2010) cautioned that direct causation could not be inferred from the study (such as using Facebook directly causes a student to spend fewer hours on his or her school
668
Table 2 Summary of main ndings related to current Facebook research. Topic Facebook usage prole/the extent to which students use Facebook Subtopic Motives for Facebook use Time spent on Facebook Number of friends on Facebook Main nding Nine motives were identied. Main motive was to maintain existing relationship with known people. Very few education-related activities on Facebook were found Students mainly spend between 10 and 60 min every day. Younger students are more likely to use Facebook Number of friends tends to range from 150 to 350. Association between extraversion and number of friends appeared to be mix. Female students are more likely to have more Facebook friends Students tend to disclose more personal information (with the exception of ofine contact particulars) on Facebook compared to other means of communication Results regarding student privacy settings appear to be mix. However, female students are more likely to make their prole private than males No signicant impact on the number of discussion post and student perceived social presence compared to threaded Moodle forums Students reported higher levels of teacher trustworthiness and caring attributes when the teacher provided more information about herself Students who used Facebook reported having lower GPAs and spend fewer hours studying per week than non-users. However, direct causation could not be inferred Students mainly view Facebook use as fun and not something serious. Few negative effects of using Facebook are reported
Information disclosure Privacy settings Effects of using Facebook Effects of Facebook use on students discussion and social presence Effects of Facebook self-disclosure on teacher credibility Effects of Facebook on students academic performance Satisfaction and dissatisfaction of using Facebook
Attitudes toward Facebook
self-disclosure, (c) assurances efforts to convey or express validation or support, (d) joint activities spending time together, (e) routine communication activities engaging in regular daily or weekly activities, and (f) avoidance efforts to evade issues that could foster tension or conict. Although RM theory was originally formulated by communication researchers to examine and explain human relationships in face-to-face environments (Canary & Stafford, 1994; Dindia & Baxter, 1987; Dindia & Canary, 1993), subsequent researchers have applied this theory to computer-mediated environment. Wright (2004), for instance, surveyed 178 undergraduate students on how they maintained their relationships via the Internet (Facebook use not explored), and found that while many strategies were used (e.g., avoidance, assurances, positivity), openness was the most frequent method. If RM is extrapolated to the context of Facebook, this theory may help explain how the very design of Facebook itself facilitates students to keep in touch with known people. For example, the RM strategy of openness through self-disclosure (e.g., updating proles, uploading pictures) is very easily accomplished through Facebook (Stern & Taylor, 2007). Students tend to signicantly disclose more personal information about themselves on Facebook than they would be using other means of communication. One reason for this, as postulated by Christodes et al. (2009) is that Facebook creates norms regarding what specic information to disclose based on what other people have disclosed and it is an environment where information is shared proactively and in response to others. In other words, peer pressure and herding behavior may also be inuencing factors for students to disclose information (Gross & Acquisti, 2005). This self-disclosure behavior on Facebook helps students feel connected with their friends from high school and college (Stern & Taylor, 2007). Results of previous research suggested that Facebook thus far has very little educational use. Very few education-related activities on Facebook were found in past research studies. One possible explanation is that students perceptions of what Facebook is to be used for are very different from academic work (Madge et al., 2009). Students, for example, pointed out that Facebook is a social networking site; a tool to get away from study instead of actually doing school work; hence students tend to purposefully demarcate boundaries to keep these two aspects separate. In addition, most of the education-related use of Facebook reported in past research tended to center upon course- or department related administrative matters (e.g., lecture schedules, assignment requirements),
expressing a sense of anger or frustration about the instructor (e.g., Selwyn, 2009), or banter (e.g., humorous postings about assessment tasks), instead of the pedagogy aspects of teaching and learning (e.g., querying, reecting, commenting on specic course-related topics or issues). However, rather than simply bemoaning the lack of pedagogic-related activities among students on Facebook, Selwyn (2009) suggested that one should perhaps see the mundane, prosaic, and often anti-intellectual (p. 170) uses to which students are using Facebook as central to the development or shaping of a student identity; for the informal learning of being a student in a higher education setting. Results from past research have also indicated that Facebook use does not, at the present moment, suggest any cause for moral panic. Most students in previous studies reported that they did not encounter any trouble of using Facebook (e.g., being stalked by strangers either online or real world). While this may bring relief to many educators and parents, it is still prudent to advise students to be careful when revealing their personal information on Facebook (e.g., real names, birth dates, hometowns, sexual preferences). The results of previous studies indicated that not all students were concerned about their personal privacy on Facebook. Gross and Acquisti (2005) cautioned that students could still be susceptible to other privacy risks that may not reported in current research, such as face re-identication from facial images on Facebook proles, and social security numbers and identity theft (which can be estimated from birth date, hometown, residence and phone number information). Moreover, there is the possibility that the perceived privacy setting of making personal information available to friends only may actually increase (rather than decrease) students willingness to reveal personal data (Gross & Acquisti, 2005). Because students have little control on the composition of their Facebook network (very often a members friend can add strangers into that particular network), it is very possible that the personal information students are disclosing even on protected networks can become public data (Gross & Acquisti, 2005). The empirical evidence to support the effectiveness of Facebook is still very limited at this moment. So far, only three studies dealt with this issue. One interesting line of research started by Mazer et al. (2009) concerns the impact of teacher self-disclosure via Facebook on student perceptions of teacher credibility. Mazer et al.s (2009) study was limited to a single female teacher (specifically a graduate teaching assistant). Future research might explore
669
how a teachers sex, age, and status (e.g., new professor, tenured professor) impact student perceptions of teacher credibility, or student motivation toward school and learning (Mazer et al., 2009). Future research should also be conducted to replicate Kirschner and Karpinski (2010)s study in order to verify the ndings on the adverse effect of Facebook use on students academic performance. This review also identies several other limitations concerning past research studies on students and teachers use of Facebook. Most research studies to date on Facebook have focused on Anglo-American undergraduate students (Madge et al., 2009, p. 152). For example, this review found that most previous studies (n = 31) focused mainly on the undergraduate student population, and that a majority of studies were conducted involving participants from North America (particularly in the USA), followed by Europe (e.g., United Kingdom), Africa (e.g., South Africa). Since the context in which Facebook is used may matter (boyd, 2006; Lewis & West, 2009; Licoppe, 2004; Zhao, 2006), future research should examine other contexts or samples such as graduate or secondary school students (e.g., middle and high school), or teachers. Future research should also be conducted with students and teachers from different countries in order to better understand whether
and how different sociocultural and geographical contexts may inuence the use of Facebook compared to the Anglo-American focus of many research to date. Most research to date merely captures a snapshot use of Facebook over a limited period of time. Currently, longitudinal study involving Facebook is rare. Lampe et al. (2008) surveyed 288, 468, and 419 undergraduates in the year 20062008 respectively. However, the researchers were unable to determine what percentage of students who participated in the rst survey also participated in the second and third, hence preventing longitudinal analysis. Future studies should be longitudinal in nature, perhaps extending the duration to more than 2 years. A longitudinal study can provide researchers the opportunity to examine whether participants perceptions of Facebook undergo change (as some students may be attracted to Facebook due to novelty reasons), as well as investigate if there are any detrimental effects of using Facebook over a long period of time. The use of Facebook is becoming increasingly ubiquitous among students in many universities. I hope that this review will be useful to researchers and educators as they continue to investigate and build a knowledge base about the use of Facebooks by students and teachers.
Appendix A. Summary of reviewed studies
Study Acar (2008)
Participants 451 Undergraduates of an introductory level communications course at a university in the USA (223 males, 228 females)
Context Data collection took place in March 2006. Course credit offered for participation
Types of data Questionnaire survey
Basic ndings Mean number of FB friends = 217 (n = 100, SD = 135). Extroversion was found to be a determinant of number of FB friends. Females had more members in their online social networks (m = 6.2I, sd = 1.4) than males (m = 5.63, sd = 1.61). Females indicated that they have been poked signicantly more than males and have a higher percentage of strangers in their online networks Students mainly used FB to keep in touch with people they already knew ofine; as a form of student activism; for academic purposes (e.g., share ideas about projects and lecture/study notes); inform lecturers which topics they would prefer an instructor to cover. One lecturer used FB to pass information to students. Another lecturer felt that FB helped students ask questions that they might not feel comfortable doing so in class Users reported spending an average of 38.86 min on Facebook (FB) daily and had a mean of 297.07 FB friends. Users perceived that they signicantly disclosed more information about themselves on FB. The need for popularity was a signicant predictor of information disclosure on FB. Users were very likely to post personal information (e.g., birthday, e-mail address, hometown, and relationship (continued on next page)
Bosch (2009)
150 Undergraduate student proles, interviews with 50 undergraduates and ve lecturers from university in South Africa. Major of study not reported
Duration of data collection not reported. Average time of FB account not mentioned
Content analysis of FB, interviews
Christodes et al. (2009)
342 Undergraduates (mainly from psychology) in Canada (81 men, 261 women; 17 24 years old with m = 18.69, SD = 1.03)
Partial course credit given for participation. Duration of data collection not reported. Average time of FB account not mentioned
Questionnaire survey
670
Appendix A (continued) Study Participants Context Types of data Basic ndings status). Users were far less likely to post their phone number and home address DeSchryver et al. (2009) Two concurrent online sections of an introductory educational psychology course (undergraduate level) at a university in the USA Experiment design. Sixteen students used the built-in Moodle forums. Fifteen students used FB. Data collection period at the end of the course (one semester). Average time of FB account not mentioned Money credit was given to participants on-campus spending accounts. Data collection in April 2006 Content analysis of FB, questionnaire survey No statistical signicance was found between the FB and Moodle discussion group with regard to the mean number of words per posting, although the mean number was higher in FB (201.32, SD = 163.73) than in Moodle (m = 188.64, SD = 154.40). Analysis also showed no statistical signicance between the two groups in terms of perceived social presence
Ellison et al. (2007)
286 Undergraduates at a university in the USA (96 males, 188 females, mean age = 20.1, SD = 1.64). Major of study not reported
Users reported spending between 10 and 30 min on average using FB each day and having between 150 and 200 friends. About 95% listed their high school name, 88% their relationship status, 81% a photo of themselves alone and their AIM screen name, and about 21% listed their mobile number in their prole. Respondents also reported signicantly more FB use involving known off line people A median of 144 friends and a mean of 179.53 friends per user were found. Messages and pokes were mainly sent to people in the same school as compared to people in different schools, and to friends rather than non-friends. FB use was lowest during college student weekend (mid-Fridaymid-Sunday), presumably when students were away from their computers 90.8% of proles contained a picture, 87.8% revealed their birth date, 39.9% listed a phone number, and 50.8% listed a current address. More males (47.1%) than female users (28.9%) posted their phone numbers. Eighty-nine of a random subset of 100 proles showed that true student names were listed in the proles. Overall, 80% of images contained at least some useful identication information. Only 1.2% of users made use of privacy settings 25.6% (n = 61) reported making their prole somewhat more private, 21% (n = 50) much more private and 10.9% (n = 26) making it as private as possible. The use of FB to maintain relationships scored consistently high. Females scored signicantly higher on measures related to maintaining existing relationship compared to males. Females more likely to report making their prole more
Golder et al. (2007)
4.2 million FB users in North America, 162 million FB messages and 79.2 million pokes (Authors argued that most users were undergraduate students)
Data collected from FB site between February 2004 and March 31, 2006. Average time of FB account not mentioned
Content analysis of FB
Gross and Acquisti (2005)
4540 Users at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) in the USA. Majority of users were undergraduates (73.7%), males (60.4%), and overall average age = 21.04 years
Virtually the entire CMU FB population in June 2005. Average time of FB account not mentioned
Joinson (2008)
241 Users (80 men, 161 female, mean age = 25.97, SD = 9.30). Majority (69.3%) were students (fulltime or part time). Geographical location not indicated. Major of study not reported
Data captured during the nal week of July and throughout August. Almost 50% of users had FB account for less than 6 months, 21.7% had signed up between 6 months and 1 year, 21.7%
671
Appendix A (continued) Study Participants Context more than 1 year but less than 2 years, and 10.8% for more than 2 years Kirschner and Karpinski (2010) 219 (102 Undergraduates, mean age = 22.06, SD = 3.72; 117 graduates, mean age = 30.29, SD = 7.03 in the USA. Eighty-seven males, 132 females. Majority were humanities and social sciences majors (72.6%) Average time of FB account not mentioned. Data captured in the summer and fall of 2008 Questionnaire survey Types of data Basic ndings private compared to males. Overall, a younger user was associated with higher usage levels, and a greater number of friends FB users reported having lower GPAs and spend fewer hours studying per week than non-users. FB users reported studying in the 15 h/week range, while the non-users in the 1115 h/week range. Relationship between FB use and GPA and hours spent studying does not depend on whether the participant is an undergraduate or a graduate student. Nor is it dependent on the students major eld of study Women were more likely than men to have a FB account. First-year students were more likely than seniors to have an account. Only about one-tenth (11%) of students restricted access to their proles. About 48% posted their full local addresses. Eighty-seven percentage posted a picture. Men (21.7%) were more than twice as likely as women (8%) to post phone numbers. The mean number of references to learning was 0.4. Overall, proles (n = 339) averaged 1.37 references to alcohol, drugs, or partying First survey: 70% of users spent 30 min or less on FB per day. Second survey: 69% spent 30 min or less on FB per day. FB was used most likely to keep in touch with friends from high school, or nd out more about someone with whom they had a previous connection. Finding casual sex partners, nding people to date and nding people to date ofine were rare 93.8% Listed their sex, 83.8% posted their birthdays, 83.3% their hometowns, 78.5% their relationship status, 87.1% their high school, 67.8% their AOL instant messenger screen name. Many also opted to post some of their favorite music and movies, favorite books, favorite quotes, and slightly less than half favorite TV shows. 13.5% listed their current ofine mailing address. Undergraduates had more FB friends than others. Referents elements most likely to predict the number of FB friends Most common use of FB was to keep in touch with old friends, rather than meet new people. FB users reported positive attitudes toward the site. No strong (continued on next page)
Kolek and Saunders (2008)
339 Undergraduates in the USA. Major of study not reported. Actual number of men and women out of the 330 sample not indicated
Average time of FB account not mentioned. Data captured over a 10 day period
Lampe et al. (2006)
1440 and 1085 rst-year students at Michigan State University in the USA. Major of study not reported
First survey conducted at end of August 2005, second survey in the 3rd week of January 2006. For the rst survey, 68% reported that they created their accounts within the last 3 months Whole FB population in MSU (subject to accessibility). Data collection period from April 1 to 13
Lampe et al. (2007)
30,773 Students proles at Michigan State University in the USA. Major of study not reported
Lampe et al. (2008)
288, 468, and 419 Undergraduate students at Michigan State University in the USA
1st survey in 2006, 2nd survey in 2007, 3rd survey in 2008
Questionnaire survey, interviews (n = 18)
672
Appendix A (continued) Study Participants Context Types of data Basic ndings negative consequences of using FB were reported Lewis et al. (2008) 1710 Undergraduate students at a private university in the USA. Major of study not reported First batch of data downloaded in March 2006, second bath in March 2007. Students have been located in FB at some point or another during the last 2 years Data collected over a 2 month period. Average time of FB account not mentioned Content analysis of FB 568 (33.2%) had private proles in the summer of 2007. Of these, 39 (6.9%) had proles that were searchable but could not be viewed in full, and 529 (93.1%) were not searchable at all. The more frequently a user manipulates their prole, the more likely the user is to adopt a private prole in the future. Women are signicantly more likely to have private proles than are men Most respondents reported having 100 200 FB friends. No respondent reported joining FB to make new friends. Only two said that they had friends (one/two) whom they had not met face-to-face. For the most part, communicating on FB was seen as fun and not serious Students joined FB to make new friends at the university, to keep in touch with known friends and family at home, and to plan social events. Students perceived FB was used most importantly for social reasons, although it was sometimes used informally for learning purposes (e.g., for revision, arranging group or project work, that was often initiated by students themselves and not part of the course formal requirement) Participants in the high teacher selfdisclosure condition reported higher levels of teacher trustworthiness and teacher caring than participants in the low teacher self-disclosure group. No signicant difference between the high and low disclosure conditions on perceived teacher competence Participants in the current sample reported spending an average of 38.93 min on Facebook each day (SD = 32.13) and had a mean of 296 friends. Women, m = 40.57, SD = 26.76, spent signicantly more time on Facebook than men Communication with friends was the most common type of activity, followed by communication with family. Most students (85.5%) reported that they had never used FB to communicate with an instructor. Few students reported using FB for school tasks Participants reported spending just over 30 min daily on FB. Shyness was signicantly negatively correlated with the number of FB friends
Lewis and West (2009)
16 London-based undergraduates in the humanities, social sciences and sciences (seven men, nine women, mean age = 22)
Interview
Madge et al. (2009)
213 First year undergraduates at a British university (67% females) from disciplines such as science, social science, arts)
Data gathered over a 6-week period between April and June 2008. Average time of FB account not mentioned
Mazer et al. (2009)
129 Undergraduates of a basic . Course at a University in the USA (38 males, 91 females, mean age = 18.74 years)
Course credit offered for student participation. Duration of data collection not reported. Average time of FB account not mentioned. Experiment design Duration of data collection not reported. Average time of FB account not mentioned
Muise et al. (2009)
308 Undergraduates from a university (mainly from psychology) in Canada (77 men, 231 women; 17 24 years old with m = 18.70, SD = 0.97) 110 Undergraduates (elementary education majors) in the USA (107 females; three males; 100 between 18 and 19 years old)
Ophus and Abbitt (2009)
Duration of data collection not reported. Average time of FB account not mentioned
Orr et al. (2009)
103 Undergraduates at a university in Canada (16 men, 87 women, mean age = 21.50 years, SD = 5.29).
Data gathered over a 2-week period in February 2008. Course credit offered
673
Appendix A (continued) Study Participants Recruited via the universitys psychology pool Context for student participation. Average time of FB account not mentioned Data gathered over a 7-day period. Average time of FB account about 2 years. Extra credit offered for student participation Questionnaire survey, reection data Students used FB about 30 min throughout the day. They used FB most often for social interaction, primarily with friends whom the students had a pre-established relationship ofine. Most students (77.7%) reported that none of their FB friends originated online. More younger than older students used FB to stay in touch with people that they already knew. Meeting new people (8.7% of respondents) and nding help with schoolwork (2.17%) were rarely mentioned. Females reported having signicantly more friends than males Majority of users (79%) reported that they spent between 10 and 60 min on FB daily. Levels of Extraversion were not associated with number of FB friends, time spent online or use of communicative FB features (e.g., frequency of status change) Types of data Basic ndings
Pempek et al. (2009)
92 Psychology undergraduates in the USA (60 females, mean age = 20.59 years, SD = 1.07)
Ross et al. (2009)
97 Students from a university in Canada (15 men, 82 women, having an average age of 21.69 years, SD = 5.40). Recruited through the universitys psychology pool. Mean age indicated that a majority of the participants were undergraduates 612 Undergraduate Social Sciences students of publicly accessible proles in the UK. Majority aged between 18 and 25 years. Number of males and females out of the 612 students not mentioned
Course credit offered for participation. Data collected over a 2-week period. Average time of FB account not mentioned
Selwyn (2009)
Total undergraduate population = 909. However, 612 had publicly accessible FB proles for analysis. Data collected over 18 weeks. Average time of FB account not mentioned Participation in study was voluntary, but students received credits if they completed the survey. Duration of study not indicated. Average time of FB account was 18 months
Only 4% of a total of 68,169 Wall postings were related to education-use. No signicant difference was found in terms of education-related FB activity by students gender, year of study or assessment marks
Sheldon (2008a)
172 Students of communication classes in the USA (74 males, 98 females; mean age = 19.92 years, SD = 1.23). 95.6% of participants = undergraduates
Sheldon (2008b)
172 Students of communication classes in the USA (74 males, 98 females; mean age = 19.92 years, SD = 1.23). 95.6% of participants = undergraduates
Participation in study was voluntary, but students received credits if they completed the survey. Duration of study not indicated
Fifty percentage of respondents changed proles every few months. Users on average spent 47 min a day. Majority had between 200 and 350 FB friends. People use FB mainly to for relationship maintenance and to pass time. Women more likely to use FB to maintain existing relationships. Men more likely to use FB to develop new relationships. Younger users were more likely than older ones to use FB to maintain existing relationships and meet new people Students who were anxious about faceto-face communication went to FB to pass time or to feel less lonely, but tended to have fewer FB friends rather than more. It is important to note that most of the correlation coefcients indicated only weak relationships (continued on next page)
674
Appendix A (continued) Study Steineld, Ellison, and Lampe (2008) Participants 92 Undergraduate students at a university in the USA who completed a survey in both 2006 and 2007. Major of study not reported Context $5 credit to a universityadministered spending account given for participation. Also the chance to win a $50 rafe. Data collection in April 2006 and April 2007. Average time of FB account not mentioned Average time of FB account not mentioned. Data collection period not indicated Types of data Questionnaire survey, interview Basic ndings Participants reported spending signicantly more time per day on Facebook in 2007 than in 2006, increasing by roughly 21 min per day on average. The number of total friends participants reported having on Facebook also increased, growing by 50% from 223 in 2006 to 339 in 2007
Stern and Taylor (2007)
364 Students (mainly undergraduates 95%) (134 men, 210 women, 20 did not indicate gender) in the USA. Major of study not reported
Sixty-two percentage of users allowed everyone at the university to access their proles. Only 3% limited their privacy settings to communicate with only people whom they knew. Seventy-four percentage of users reported that their proles were accurate representations of themselves. About 96% logged onto FB from less than 1060 min every day. Most common uses of FB were for sending messages to friends and viewing photos. Users also used FB to check out people, to entertain themselves, to procrastinate. Overall, most users did not encounter negative effects from FB use Ninety percentage of undergraduates reported using FB as compared to 22% of graduates/professional students. About 62% of students posted their address information in FB. About 15% posted their telephone number in FB Mean number of FB friends = 395.02. Overall, a curvilinear inverted-U shaped relationship between level of extraversion and number of FB friends was found. This suggests that having an exceedingly large number of friends leads to judgments that prole owners are not sociable and outgoing Younger users were more likely than older ones to use Facebook. Female students (66%) were more likely to have a Facebook account than male students (37%). A majority of the students (34.9% of 2437) indicated that they spent between 30 min to 1 h each day on Facebook The mean number of FB friends was 245.91 (SD = 183.76), and mode = 200
Stutzman (2006)
38 Students (20 undergraduates, 18 graduates/professional) from a university in the USA. Major of study not reported 132 Undergraduate students at a university in the USA (53% female, mean age = 20.18, SD = 1.32, mode = 21). Major of study not reported
Average time of FB account not mentioned. Data collection period not indicated Experiment design. Course credit given for participation. Average time of FB account not mentioned. Data collection period not indicated Data collection between November 9December 9, 2007. Lucky draw of four $25 Amazon gift cards given. Average time of FB account not mentioned Extra credit given. Duration of study not indicated. Average time of FB account not mentioned
Tong et al. (2008)
Valenzuela et al. (2009)
2437 Students with FB account from a predominantly undergraduate university and a commuter school in the USA (mean age = 20.71 years, 66% females). Major of study not reported 342 Undergraduates at a university in the USA (53% male, mean age = 19.9, SD = 1.77)
Walther, Van Der Heide, Kim, Westerman, and Tong (2008)
675
Appendix A (continued) Study Wang et al. (2010) Participants 311 College students in an introductory communication course from a university in the USA (57% male students, mean age = 20.2 years, SD = 0.187) 150 Students in the USA. 136 undergraduates and 14 graduates, 67% males, 81 females, 2% unknown Context Credit given for participation. Duration of study not indicated. Average time of FB account not mentioned 150 FB photos from 150 students. Three students from each of the 50 states. Duration of study not indicated. Average time of FB account not mentioned Data collected over a 2-month period between August and October 2007. Students had joined Facebook late in 2005. Duration of Facebook use about 2 years Data collection done between October 2007 and February 2008. Average time of FB account not mentioned Types of data Questionnaire survey Basic ndings Male subjects were more willing to initiate friendships with female prole owners than with male prole owners. On the other hand, female students did not differ in their willingness to initiate friendships with male prole owners or female prole owners Fourteen of 150 photos portrayed in FB contained incidences of alcohol consumption. No incidences of illegal drug use, four photos of suggestive/ obscene behavior, and one photo involved nudity or partial nudity, all of which occurred at the undergraduate level. No incidences of sexual acts Almost all had met their FB friends in person, and none reported having joined FB to make new friends. FB friends were generally peers of a similar age. Only one user reported that her mother was a FB friend
Watson et al. (2006)
West et al. (2009)
16 London-based undergraduates in the humanities, social sciences and sciences (seven men, nine women, between 21 and 26 years old, mean age = 22)
Interview
Young and QuanHaase (2009)
77 undergraduates enrolled in communication studies at a university in Canada (mean age = 19.68, SD = 1.26; 17 25 years, 71% = females)
Questionnaire survey, interview (21, of which 16 were female)
Zhao et al. (2008)
63 Students FB accounts in the USA. Mean age not mentioned. Mixture of study majors
Duration of study not indicated. Average time of FB account not mentioned
99.35% Reported using their actual name in their prole. Nearly two-thirds of respondents indicated their sexual orientation, relationship status, and interests. 97.4% posted their school name, 83.1% their e-mail address, 92.2% their birth date, 80.5% their the current city or town in which they live, and almost all respondents reported posting an image of themselves (98.7%) and photos of their friends (96.1%). Few respondents reported disclosing their physical address (7.9%), their cell phone number (10.5%) or their IM screen name (16%). 7.9% left their prole open to anyone on Facebook. Personal network size was positively associated with information revelation. Concern for unwanted Facebook audiences showed no relationship with information revelation Sexually provocative messages were rare. Users used FB to make one-self popular among friends, to make new friends. Most users (59 of 63) posted their e-mail address on FB, 39 disclosed their IM screen names. Only four out of 63 users provided their complete mailing address
References
Acar, A. (2008). Antecedents and consequences of online social networking behavior: The case of facebook. Journal of Website Promotion, 3(1/2), 6283.
Blessinger, K., & Olle, M. (2004). Content analysis of the leading general academic databases. Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services, 28, 335346. Bosch, T. E. (2009). Using online social networking for teaching and learning: Facebook use at the university of cape town. Communicatio: South African Journal for Communication Theory and Research, 35(2), 185200.
676
K.F. Hew / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676 about work than for actually doing work. Learning, Media & Technology, 34(2), 141155. Mazer, J. P., Murphy, R. E., & Simonds, C. J. (2009). The effects of teacher selfdisclosure via facebook on teacher credibility. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 175183. McCrae, R. R. (1992). The ve-factor model: Issues and applications [Special issue]. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 175. McCroskey, J. C., Hamilton, P. R., & Weiner, A. M. (1974). The effect of interaction behavior on source credibility, homophily, and interpersonal attraction. Human Communication Research, 1(1), 4252. Muise, A., Christodes, E., & Desmarais, S. (2009). More information than you ever wanted: Does facebook bring out the green-eyed monster of jealousy? CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(4), 441444. Munoz, C., & Towner, T. (2009). Opening facebook: How to use facebook in the college classroom. In I. Gibson et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of society for information technology & teacher education international conference 2009 (pp. 26232627). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Nardi, B. A., Whittaker, S., & Bradner, E. (2000). Interaction and outeraction: Instant messaging in action. In Proceedings of the 2000 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 7988). New York, NY: ACM. Ophus, J. D., & Abbitt, J. T. (2009). Exploring the potential perceptions of social networking systems in university courses. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 5(4). <http://jolt.merlot.org/vol5no4/ophus_1209.htm> Retrieved 27.04.10. Orr, E. S., Sisic, M., Ross, C., Simmering, M. G., Arseneault, J. M., & Orr, R. R. (2009). The inuence of shyness on the use of facebook in an undergraduate sample. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(3), 337340. Pempek, T. A., Yermolayeva, Y. A., & Calvert, S. (2009). College students social networking experiences on facebook. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(3), 227238. Ross, C., Orr, E. S., Sisic, M., Arseneault, J. M., Simmering, M. G., & Orr, R. R. (2009). Personality and motivations associated with facebook use. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 578586. Selwyn, N. (2009). Faceworking: Exploring students education-related use of facebook. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 157174. Sheldon, P. (2008a). Student favourite: Facebook and motives for its use. Southwestern Mass Communication Journal, 23(2), 3953. Sheldon, P. (2008b). The relationship between unwillingness-to-communicate and students facebook use. Journal of Media Psychology, 20(2), 6775. Steineld, C., Ellison, N. B., Lampe, C. (2008). Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(6), 434445. Stern, L. A., & Taylor, K. (2007). Social networking on facebook. Journal of the Communication, Speech & Theatre Association of North Dakota, 20, 920. Stutzman, F. (2006). An evaluation of identity-sharing behavior in social network communities. International Digital and Media Arts Journal, 3(1). <http:// citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/ download?doi=10.1.1.91.617&rep=rep1&type=pdf> Retrieved 24.02.10. Tong, S. T., Van Der Heide, B., Langwell, L., & Walther, J. B. (2008). Too much of a good thing? The relationship between number of friends and interpersonal impressions on facebook. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(3), 531549. Urista, M. A., Dong, Q., & Day, K. D. (2009). Explaining why young adults use MySpace and Facebook through uses and gratications theory. Human Communication, 12(2), 215229. Valenzuela, S., Park, N., & Kee, K. F. (2009). Is there social capital in a social network site?: Facebook use and college students life satisfaction, trust, and participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 875901. Walther, J. B., Van Der Heide, B., Kim, S.-Y., Westerman, D., & Tong, S. T. (2008). The role of friends appearance and behavior on evaluations of individuals on facebook: Are we known by the company we keep? Human Communication Research, 34(1), 2849. Wang, S. S., Moon, S., Kwon, K. H., Evans, C. A., & Stefanone, M. A. (2010). Face off: Implications of visual cues on initiating friendship on facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 226234. Watson, S. W., Smith, Z., & Driver, J. (2006). Alcohol, sex and illegal activities: An analysis of selected facebook central photos in fty states. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED493049). West, A., Lewis, J., & Currie, P. (2009). Students facebook Friends: Public and private spheres. Journal of Youth Studies, 12(6), 615627. Wright, K. B. (2004). On-line relational maintenance strategies and perceptions of partners within exclusively internet-based and primarily internet-based relationships. Communication Studies, 55(2), 239253. Young, A. L., & Quan-Haase, A. (2009). Information revelation and internet privacy concerns on social network sites: A case study of facebook. In Proceedings of the fourth international conference on communities and technologies (pp. 265274). New York: ACM. Zhao, S. (2006). The internet and the transformation of the reality of everyday life: Toward a new analytic stance in sociology. Sociological Inquiry, 76(4), 458474. Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 18161836.
boyd, D. (2006). Friends, friendsters, and Myspace top 8: Writing community into being on social network sites. First Monday 11(12), December. <http:// www.rstmonday.org/issues/issue11_12/boyd/index.html> Retrieved 9.02.10. Buckman, R. (2005). Too much information? Colleges fear student postings on popular facebook site could pose security risks. The Wall Street Journal, P. B1. Cain, J. (2008). Online Social Networking Issues Within Academia and Pharmacy Education. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 72(1). <http:// www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2254235/pdf/ajpe10.pdf> Retrieved 18.01.10. Canary, D. J., & Stafford, L. (1994). Maintaining relationships through strategic <md routine inteiac tion. In D. J. Canary & L. Stafford (Eds.), Communication and relational maintenance (pp. 322). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Canary, D., Stafford, L., Hause, K., & Wallace, I. (1993). An inductive analysis of relational maintenance strategies: A comparison among young lovers, relatives, friends, and others. Communication Research Reports, 10, 514. Cheung, C. M. K., Chiu, P-Y., & Lee. M. K. O. (2010). Online social networks: Why do students use Facebook? Computers in Human Behavior. doi: 10.1016/ j.chb.2010.07.028. Christodes, E., Muise, A., & Desmarais, S. (2009). Information disclosure and control on Facebook: Are they two sides of the same coin or two different processes? CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(3), 341345. Creswell, J. (1994). Research design qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. DeSchryver, M., Mishra, P., Koehleer, M., & Francis, A. (2009). Moodle vs. facebook: Does using facebook for discussions in an online course enhance perceived social presence and student interaction? In I. Gibson et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of society for information technology & teacher education international conference 2009 (pp. 329336). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Dindia, K., & Baxter, I. A. (1987). Strategies for maintaining and repairing marital relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 4, 143158. Dindia, K., & Canary, D. J. (1993). Denitions and theoretical perspectives on relational maintenance. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 163173. Educause (2006). 7 Things you should know about facebook. Educause Learning Initiative. <http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7017.pdf> Retrieved 18.01.10. Ellison, N. B., Steineld, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benets of facebook Friends: Social capital and college students use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 11431168. Facebook (2009). Company timeline. <http://www.facebook.com/press/ info.php?timeline> Retrieved 22.01.10. Golder, S. A., Wilkinson, D., & Huberman, B. A. (2007). Rhythms of social interaction: Messaging within a massive online network. In C. Steinfeld, B. T. Pentland, M. Ackerman, & N. Contractor (Eds.), Communities and technologies 2007: Proceedings of the third communities and technologies conference (pp. 4166). London: Springer-Verlag Limited. Gross, R., & Acquisti, A. (2005). Information revelation and privacy in online social networks. In S. D. C. di Vimercati & R. Dingledine (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2005 ACM workshop on Privacy in the electronic society (pp. 7180). New York: ACM. Joinson, A. N. (2008). Looking at, Looking up or Keeping up with people? Motives and uses of facebook. In Proceedings of the 26th annual SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 10271036). New York: ACM. Kirschner, P. A., & Karpinski, A. C. (2010). Facebook and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 12371245. Kolek, E. A., & Saunders, D. (2008). Online disclosure: An empirical examination of undergraduate facebook proles. NASPA Journal, 45(1), 125. Lampe, C., Ellison, N., & Steineld, C. (2006). A face(book) in the crowd: Social searching vs. social browsing. In Proceedings of the 2006 20th anniversary conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 167170). New York: ACM. Lampe, C., Ellison, N., & Steineld, C. (2007). A familiar face(book): Prole elements as signals in an online social network. In Proceedings of the 26th annual SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in computing systems (pp. 435444). New York: ACM. Lampe, C., Ellison, N., & Steineld, C. (2008). Changes in use and perception of facebook. In Proceedings of the ACM 2008 conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 721730). New York: ACM. Lewis, K., Kaufman, J., & Christakis, N. (2008). The taste for privacy: An analysis of college student privacy settings in an online social network. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(1), 79100. Lewis, J., & West, A. (2009). Friending: London-based undergraduates experience of facebook. New Media & Society, 11(7), 12091229. Licoppe, C. (2004). Connected presence: The emergence of a new repertoire for managing social relationships in a changing communication technoscape. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 22(1), 135156. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Livingstone, S. (2008). Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: Teenagers use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and selfexpression. New Media & Society, 10(3), 393411. Madge, C., Meek, J., Wellens, J., & Hooley, T. (2009). Facebook, social integration and informal learning at university: It is more for socialising and talking to friends

Students' and Teachers' Use of Facebook

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Students' and Teachers' Use of Facebook

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers in Human Behavior

Students and teachers use of Facebook

Tel.: +65 67903282; fax: +65 68968038.

K.F. Hew / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676

K.F. Hew / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676

Effects of using Facebook

Attitudes toward Facebook

K.F. Hew / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676

K.F. Hew / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676

K.F. Hew / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676

ibility, students discussion performance.

K.F. Hew / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676

Attitudes toward Facebook

K.F. Hew / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676

Appendix A. Summary of reviewed studies

Study Acar (2008)

Types of data Questionnaire survey

Content analysis of FB, interviews

Christodes et al. (2009)

K.F. Hew / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676

Ellison et al. (2007)

Golder et al. (2007)

Gross and Acquisti (2005)

K.F. Hew / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676

Kolek and Saunders (2008)

Lampe et al. (2006)

Lampe et al. (2007)

Lampe et al. (2008)

1st survey in 2006, 2nd survey in 2007, 3rd survey in 2008

Questionnaire survey, interviews (n = 18)

K.F. Hew / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676

Lewis and West (2009)

Madge et al. (2009)

Mazer et al. (2009)

Muise et al. (2009)

Ophus and Abbitt (2009)

Orr et al. (2009)

K.F. Hew / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676

Pempek et al. (2009)

Ross et al. (2009)

K.F. Hew / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676

Stern and Taylor (2007)

Tong et al. (2008)

Valenzuela et al. (2009)

Walther, Van Der Heide, Kim, Westerman, and Tong (2008)

K.F. Hew / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 662676

Watson et al. (2006)

West et al. (2009)

Young and QuanHaase (2009)

Questionnaire survey, interview (21, of which 16 were female)

Zhao et al. (2008)

Duration of study not indicated. Average time of FB account not mentioned

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen