Social Motives for Using Social Networks: Analysis of User Groups

The article describes various social motives for using social networks (maintaining and developing relationships, belongness to a particular group, and self-presentation). The results of the study showed that users of social networks (n = 579) can be divided into four different profiles depending on the degree of their motivation to use social networks (1 — moderate orientation to belongness and self-presentation; 2 — orientation towards main¬taining social relations ; 3 — low social motivation; 4 — high social motivation). The comparison of users from different profiles by their personality traits and online behavior showed that users with high social motivation demonstrate the higher level of extraversion, agree¬ableness, and openness to experience compared with individuals from other profiles. Users from the “orientation towards maintaining social relations” profile do not differ from users with low social motivation in terms of the level of agreeableness and openness to experience, and users from the profile “moderate orientation to belongness and self-presentation” do not differ from users with high motivation regarding the level of neuroticism and openness to experience. In general, respondents from the profile with high social motivation demonstrate the most intensive use of social networks for all behavioral parameters. The smallest differences in behavior in the social networks are observed between respondents from the profiles “orientation towards maintaining social relations” and “low social motivation,’’ as well as “moderate orientation to belongness and self-presentation” and “high social motivation”.

 

1.                   Agadullina E. Social networks user: current research [Elektronnyi resurs]. Sovremennaia zarubezhnaia psikhologiia [ Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology], 2015. Vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 36—46. doi:10.17759/jmfp.2015040305. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)

2.                   Belinskaya E.P., Frantova D.K. Aktivnost’ v virtual’nom vzaimodeistvii kak faktor konstruirovaniya identichnosti pol’zovatelyami sotsial’nykh setei: mezhpokolennye razlichiya [Activity in the virtual interaction as a factor of identity construction by social networks users, intergenerational differences]. Vestnik RGGU. Seriya «Psikhologiya. Pedagogika. Obrazovanie» [ RGGU Bulletin. Series: Psychology. Pedagogics. Education], 2017, no. 3, pp. 22—37.

3.                   Gurkina O.A., Mal’tseva D.V. Motivy ispol’zovaniya virtual’nykh sotsial’nykh setei podrostkami [Teenagers’ motives for social network site use]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological study], 2015, no. 5, pp. 123—130.

4.                   Sergeeva Yu. Sotsial’nye seti v 2018 godu: global’noe issledovanie [Elektronnyi resurs]. [Social networking in 2018 year: a global study].URL: https://www.web-canape. ru/business/socialnye-seti-v-2018-godu-globalnoe-issledovanie/ (Accessed: 06.07.2018).

5.                   Shchebetenko S.A. «Luchshii chelovek v mire»: ustanovki na cherty lichnosti v kontekste bol’shoi pyaterki [“The best man in the world”: Attitudes toward personality traits]. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki [ Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics], 2014, no. 3, pp. 129—148.

6.                   Alhabash S., Park H., Kononova A., Chiang, Y., Wise K. Exploring the Motivations of Facebook Use in Taiwan. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 2012. Vol. 15 (6), pp. 304—311. doi:10.1089/cyber.2011.0611

7.                   Barker V. Older adolescents’ motivations for social network site use: the influence of gender, group identity, and collective self-esteem. Cyberpsychology & Behavior : The Impact of the Internet, Multimedia and Virtual Reality on Behavior and Society, 2009. Vol. 12 (2), pp. 209—213. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2008.0228

8.                   Baumeister R.F., Leary M.R. The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 1995. Vol. 117 (3), pp. 497— 529. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497

9.                   Click and connect: Young Australians’ use of online social media [Electronic Resource]. Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA). 2009. 100 p. URL: https:// www.web-canape.ru/business/socialnye-seti-v-2018-godu-globalnoe-issledovanie/ (Accessed: 26.02.2018).

10.               Davis K. Friendship 2.0: Adolescents ’ experiences of belonging and self-disclosure online. Journal of Adolescence, 2012. Vol. 35 (6), pp. 1527—1536. doi:10.1016/j. adolescence.2012.02.013

11.               Di Capua I. A Literature Review of Research on Facebook Use. The Open Communication Journal, 2012. Vol. 6 (1), pp. 37—42. doi:10.2174/1874916X01206010037

12.               Ellison N.B., Steinfield C., Lampe C. Connection strategies: Social capital implications of Facebook-enabled communication practices. New media & Society, 2010. Vol. 13 (6), pp. 873—892. doi: 10.1177/1461444810385389

13.               Ellison N.B., Steinfield C., Lampe C. The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2007. Vol. 12 (4), pp. 1143—1168. doi.org/10.1111/j.1083- 6101.2007.00367.x

14.               Granovetter M. The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 1973. Vol. 78 (6), pp. 1360—1380. doi:10.1086/225469

15.               Helliwell J.F., Putnam R.D. The social context of well-being. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 2004. Vol. 359 (1449), pp. 1435—1446. doi:10.1098/rstb.2004.1522

16.               Huang J., Kumar S., Hu C. Gender Differences in Motivations for Identity Reconstruction on Social Network Sites. International Journal of Human—Computer Interaction, 2018. Vol. 34 (7), pp. 591—602. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2017.1383061

17.               Kim J.W., Chock T.M. Personality traits and psychological motivations predicting selfie posting behaviors on social networking sites. Telematics and Informatics journal, 2017. Vol. 34 (5), pp. 560—571. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2016.11.006

18.               Liu D., Ainsworth S.E., Baumeister R.F. A meta-analysis of social networking online and social capital. Review of General Psychology, 2016. Vol. 20 (4), pp. 369—391. doi: 10.1037/gpr0000091

19.               Manago A.M., Graham M.B., Greenfield P.M., Salimkhan G. Self-presentation and gender on MySpace. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 2008. Vol. 29 (6), pp. 446— 458. doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2008.07.001

20.               Nadkarni A., Hofmann S.G. Why do people use Facebook? Personality and Individual Differences, 2012. Vol. 52 (3), pp. 243—249. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2011.11.007

21.               Oxford English Dictionary [Electronic resource]. URL: http://www. oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/selfie (Accessed: 26.06.2018).

22.               Putnam R.D. Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster, 2000. 544 p. doi: 10.1145/358916.361990

23.               Qiu L., Lu J., Yang S., Qu W., Zhu T. What does your selfie say about you? Computers in Human Behavior, 2015. Vol. 52, pp. 443—449. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.032

24.               Seidman G. Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: how personality influences social media use and motivations. Personality and Individual Differences, 2013. Vol. 54 (3), pp. 402—407. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2012.10.009

25.               Stillman T.F., Baumeister R.F., Lambert N.M., Crescioni A.W., DeWall C.N., Fincham F.D. Alone and without purpose: Life loses meaning following social exclusion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2009. Vol. 45, pp. 686—694. doi: 10.1016/j. jesp.2009.03.007

26.               Sung Y., Lee J.A., Kim E., Choi S.M. Why we post selfies: Understanding motivations for posting pictures of oneself. Personality and Individual Differences, 2016. Vol. 97, pp. 260—265. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.03.032

27.               Zhao S., Grasmuck S., Martin J. Identity construction on Facebook: digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 2008. Vol. 24 (5), pp. 1816—1836. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.012