View
4
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Online sociability:Social relationships and the Internet
Corinna di Gennarocorinna.digennaro@oii.ox.ac.uk
OII Summer Doctoral Programme, Oxford, 18 July 2006
Today’s session
• Theoretical perspectives
• Example from existing research
• Discussion: further research questions, methodology
Theoretical Perspectives –the story so far (I)
• Is computer-mediated communication (CMC) good for relationships formation?
• Cues filtered out theories: anonimity, lack of cues, unhibited behaviour (Kiesler, Siegel, & McGuire, 1984)
• Hyper-personal relationships: shared interests, people’s true selves (Walther, 1996)
Theoretical Perspectives –the story so far (II)
• Does the Internet detract or increase sociability?
• Isolation, depression (Nie & Erbring, 2000; Kraut et al. 1998)
• Internet users more sociable (Kraut et al. 2002)
• Focus on online to offline transition
Web 2.0 & Social software
• Mailing lists, Usenet, email
• SS allows to connect/collaborate through computer mediated communication
• IM, IRC, Internet forums, Blogs, Wikis
• Social bookmarking (e.g. del.icio.us)
• Social citations (eg. CiteULike)
• Social network services (e.g. MySpace, Facebook, Flickr, Bebo, Xanga, LiveJournal, Friendster, Meetup)
Social networking sites
• Profile, friends, comments, online diaries, blogs; uploading of videos, photos, music
• Bottom-up creation of online communities
• Voluntary membership, shared interests
• Self-governing/policing + moderator
• Sustainability thanks to mechanisms of reputation and trust
The negative repercussions
• Misalignment btw users’ perceptions of their audience and the actual audience
• Image management problems
• Privacy & Cyber-safety (stalking, identity theft)
• Problematic content (e.g. racist, sexist)
• Bandwidth theft & copyright infringement
• Lack of regulation?
• Information overload
Our research questions
• Does the Internet reconfigure people’s social networks?
• What are the factors which lead people to meet new friends online?
• Under what conditions do social relationships formed online migrate to face-to-face settings?
Data and methodology
• Oxford Internet Survey (OxIS) 2005• 2,185 respondents, 72% response rate• National multi-stage probability sample• 14 year olds and older• England, Scotland and Wales• 60% current Internet users• Gender, age, education and social grade divides
The Internet and social relationships
• 20% of Internet users have met new people or made new friends online
• Of these, 56% met in person at least one of the friends they had met online
• 74% agree ‘Internet allows me to keep in touch with people’
• 44% agree ‘Internet permits to get personal information about me’
• 64% disagree ‘It is easier for me to meet people online than in person’
Making friends online
1.1
2.6 2.83.2 3.3
1
1.9 2
3.3
77.7
2.22.6
0.90.80.6
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Japan USA Singapore Korea Macao Hungary Britain China(Urban)
Number of online friends never met in person
Number of online friends met in person
Source: WIP, circa 2003; OxIS 2005 for British data.
Dependent variables
1. Perceived social value of the Internet
2. Friends met online
3. Online friends met in person
Explanatory variables• Model 1: Socio-demographic factors (gender, age,
education, social grade, employment status, health status, marital status)
• Model 2: Years online, Internet ability, broadband, online context of communication (blog, website, distribution lists, message board, chat, IM, email, post photos)
• Model 3: Attitudes (Shyness/helplessness, perceived risk, confidence in people you communicate with)
• Model 4: Types of Internet use (Entertainment, Information, Communication, Banking, Learning, Planning)
• Multivariate analysis: linear + logistic regression
Dep var 1: Perceived social value of the Internet
• None of the socio-demographic factors had a significant effect
• Posting photos, chat, emails (+) but this disappears once we control for:
• Confidence in people you communicate with (+)• Entertainment (+)• Communication (+)• Planning (+)
Dep var 2: Meeting online friends
• Being single (+) and living with a partner (+)• Effect of age disappears once we control for
experience and communication context• Hours online (+)• Blog (-), message board (+), chat (+)• Perceived risk (-)• Learning (+)• Communication (+)
Dep var 3: Meeting online friends in person
• Gender: female (-)• Social grade (-)• Years online (+)• Blog (+), posting photos (+)• No effect of attitudes• No effect of types of Internet use
Summary• Different explanatory variables have different
impacts on each of the three dependent variables
• Age not significant: surprising result?
• Interesting result: the impact of different types of use.
• Dynamics of online friendships not driven by technological determinism but by a rich ecology of online behaviours
• Policy implications: must move beyond identification of different user groups approach (i.e. young people)
Social Implications
• How meaningful are the social relationships formed online?
• Strong ties vs. weak ties
• Social capital creation
• ‘Bridging’ vs. ‘bonding’ social capital – the role of similarity (Mesch)
• Digital have and have nots (e.g. Facebook)
Discussion
• Social networking: something for digital natives only?
• …….
• …….
• …….
Recommended