Technology and Social Media

We have come a long way from the Internet being an idea shared by a few scientists as a way to more effectively share research and ideas. It coupled with the advent of increasingly more portable and affordable devices such as laptops, notebooks, iPads and smart phones has encouraged technological salience and revolutionised communication. Exchanges are no longer geographically limited. Communication has accelerated. And, the hardwired human propensity to connect is now facilitated and amplified by technological forums such as Facebook, Twitter, Tumbler and Pinterest to name a few.

The Internet and Social Networking Sites

The influence of and potential for addiction and impact on wellbeing has made the Internet and social networking sites (SNS), such as Facebook (FB), a focus of research and considerable debate[1]. SNS are however meeting a particular need. Attempts to clarify that need have identified the rationale for usage to include communication friendship, information, self-presentation and self-status seeking[2].

Communication

We are social beings. Technology in transcending the boundaries of time and space has fostered connection which in turn has been amplified by SNS. The benefits of greater access however have been tempered by the risks.

Isolation and Truncated Conversation

The paradox of increased connection is increased detachment and isolation. Face to face, in-person communication is increasingly being replaced with online communication e.g., email, texts, instant messaging and tweets. The briefer, the better. Hence the rise and rise of abbreviated words and use of emoticons. Communication is being dumbed down. Conversation is illusory; it is being confused with connection. Online, the patience of an in-person conversation is being replaced with impatience. Brevity and lack of in-person non-verbal and intonational cues means the potential for misinterpretation and unintentional offence is growing. Further, masking what one is really thinking and feeling has never been easier. Is the undisclosed thought the last bastion of privacy?

Loss of Privacy

Information disclosure and self-disclosure, a hallmark of intimacy, manifests differently online versus in-person. The mediated nature of online communication has liberated expression, not always positively (e.g., cyber bullying, gossiping, spreading rumours), and blurred the boundaries of what is suitable for public versus private consumption. Increased disclosure of personal and private information online has decreased the notion and value of privacy. For example, research by Manago, Taylor and Greenfield (2012) into college students’ FB networks, communication patterns and wellbeing found that emotional self-disclosure contained within status updates has moved private forms of expression into the public domain.

Whilst privacy is a diminishing asset, equally as concerning is the potential permanency of the information or disclosure, and the long lasting impact this might have. Without the safety valve of being able to forget or move on, the ability to live a fulfilled life may be compromised. What if you are being treated differently based on an unfound rumour spread about you online? Or, you can’t make the right first impression in a job interview or on a date because your online data precedes you?

Friendship and Social Capital

Close relationships are known to be conducive to psychosocial wellbeing. Amongst other things, they promote resilience, allow for stress management and reduce loneliness. Although friendship is cited as a rationale for using SNS, are SNS like FB conducive for close relationships? Initial research concluded that FB was used to maintain ongoing communication with close rather than distant relations. However, more recent research has shown that this is changing and not just for “digital natives” like college or university students. Social networks are getting bigger. Manago, Taylor and Greenfield (2012) found that close contacts (e.g., best friend, very good friend, current boy or girl friend, family member or roommate) and maintained contacts (e.g., high school friends or past romantic partners) are in the minority amongst FB friends[3]. Rather, the trend is to use FB to gather a larger, superficial and more impersonal network. How is this social capital used? It was concluded that they are “audiences for individualistic self-displays” and a means of garnering more attention[4]. The larger the network, the larger the potential audience for status updates, the higher the life satisfaction[5]. Individualism is now a function of technology.

Self-presentation

Being seen and valued are two human needs considered to be fundamental to emotional wellbeing. SNS, such as FB, provide and foster the opportunity to be seen and valued[6]. They also afford a more considered approach to image management, self-presentation and self-status. Individuals now have greater scope to create, curate and strategically manage their image[7]. Research suggests that whilst FB appeals to individuals with a variety of characteristics, it is particularly appealing to people with exhibitionistic and narcissistic traits. Arguably because it gratifies a need to create an “ideal” image and engage in superficial and self-promoting behaviour e.g., writing status updates and posting photos[8].

Fame and Narcissism

Individuals with narcissistic traits have also been associated with the desire for fame (the ultimate social inclusion) and tend to spend more time on FB and check their profile page more frequently than other users[9]. It is a form of self-affirmation[10]. The concern is that because of the prevalence of narcissistic individuals on FB their behaviour may be viewed as acceptable and lead to an increase in narcissistic behaviour in users in general[11]. A key downside of which is lack of empathy. Interestingly, research has noted a sharp escalation in narcissistic personality amongst college students in the US post year 2000[12].

Social Comparison

Although social comparison is a pervasive and automatic occurrence when relating to others, self-presentation on SNS promotes comparison by others. There are ample and novel opportunities for the individual to compare themselves in a variety of domains such as material wealth, achievements, popularity, friends, partners and appearance and make either positive or negative self-judgments. For example, if someone is unemployed and having difficulty securing a position but sees that his/her friends/peers are gainfully employed then, he/she may feel inadequate. Negative social comparisons whilst using FB can influence wellbeing and increase rumination (i.e., passive and repetitive focus on negative thoughts or memories) which is associated with depressive symptomology[13]. However, not all negative social comparisons are problematic. A healthier approach is to acknowledge the perceived success of others, be inspired by it, set realistic achievable goals and enjoy the process of working towards them.

Individual Utilisation

Technology, the Internet and SNS have revolutionised the way individuals interact and how companies do business. There has never been greater access. Like most things however there are benefits and drawbacks. SNS like FB are a tool. How effective that tool is will depend on the user. Used passively to “lurk” or scroll through someone’s site may reduce wellbeing and increase negative social comparison, ruminations and depressive symptomology. Used actively to increase in-person contact (e.g., organising an event, walking group or game of touch football) will increase social capital and wellbeing.

References

[1] Greenwood, D.N. (2013). Fame, Facebook, and Twitter: How attitudes about fame predict frequency and nature of social media use. Psychology of Popular Media Culture. 2, 4, 222-236.

[2] Park et al. (2009) Being Immersed in Social Networking environment: Facebook groups, uses and gratifications and social outcomes. Cyber Psychology and Behaviour, 12(6), 729-733.

[3] Manago, A. M., Taylor, T., & Greenfield, P. M. (2012). Me and My 400 Friends: The Anatomy of College Students’ Facebook Networks, Their Communication Patterns, and Well-Being. Developmental Psychology. 48, 2, 369-380.

[4] ibid

[5] ibid

[6] Greenwood, D.N. (2013). Fame, Facebook, and Twitter: How attitudes about fame predict frequency and nature of social media use. Psychology of Popular Media Culture. 2, 4, 222-236.

[7] Krämer, N.C., & Winter, S. (2008). Impression Management 2.0. The relationship of self-esteem, extraversion, self-efficacy, and self-presentation within social networking sites. Journal of Media Psychology. 20(3), 106-116.

[8] Ryan, T., & Xenos, S. (2011). Who uses Facebook? An investigation into the relationship between the Big Five, shyness, narcissism, loneliness and Facebook usage. Computers in Human Behaviour. 27, 1658-1664.

[9] Anderson, B., Woodnutt, T., Fagan, P., & Chamorro-Premuzie, T. (2012). Facebook Psychology: Popular questions answered by research. Psychology of Popular Media Culture. 1, 1, 23-37.

[10] Toma, C.L., & Hancock, J.T. (2013). Self-affirmation underlies Facebook use. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin. 39, 321-331.

[11] Ryan, T., & Xenos, S. (2011). Who uses Facebook? An investigation into the relationship between the Big Five, shyness, narcissism, loneliness and Facebook usage. Computers in Human Behaviour. 27, 1658-1664.

[12] Manago, A. M., Taylor, T., & Greenfield, P. M. (2012). Me and My 400 Friends: The Anatomy of College Students’ Facebook Networks, Their Communication Patterns, and Well-Being. Developmental Psychology. 48, 2, 369-380.

[13] Feinstein , B.A., Hershenberg, R., Bhatia, J., et al (2013). Negative Social Comparison on Facebook and Depressive Symptoms: Rumination as a Mechanism. Psychology of Popular Media Culture. 2, 3, 161-170