happy online and in real life too?
TRANSCRIPT
FAKULTÄT BZW. TITEL
Happy Online and in Real Life too?
Anne Suphan, Ph.D. Institute of Law and Social Science - Sociology -
How Social Media Interactions Affects Real Life Well-being of Students in U.S. and Germany
@Apostelschnecke #happyonoff
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
social capital
social support
benefits for mental health
social inclusion
social isolation
negative well-being
positive
positive
positive
positive
negative
negative
positive negativeSOCIAL MEDIA
?
negativepositive REAL LIFE
onlin
eof
fline
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
(RQ1)
positive negativeSOCIAL MEDIA
?
negativepositive REAL LIFE
onlin
eof
fline
culture of usage
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
(RQ2)
(RQ1)
involvement in social media
emotional outcome
Emotional outcome of most recent Facebook use*
negativepositive
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
joyful/ fun satisfied informed excited relaxed
bored angry
frustrated tired sad
lonely envious
H1
*Krasnova, H., Wenninger, H., Widjaja, T., & Buxmann, P. (2013). Envy on Facebook: A Hidden Threat to Users’ Life Satisfaction?
general subjective well-being
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
H2
*Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The Benefits of Facebook “Friends:” Social Capital and College Students’ Use of Online Social Network Sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143–1168.
POSITIVEemotional outcomes of social media use
NEGATIVE
satisfaction joy fun
jealousy frustration sadness
SNS as part of every day life*
INCREASE DECREASE
onlin
eof
fline
frequency of real life activities
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
H3
*DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Neuman, W. R., & Robinson, J. P. (2001). Social Implications of the Internet. Annual Review of, 27, 307–336. **Burke, M., Marlow, C., & Lento, T. (2010). Social network activity and social well-being. In Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Human factors in computing systems -
CHI ’10 (pp. 1909–1912). New York, New York, USA: ACM Press*** Bude, H., & Lantermann, E.-D. (2006). Soziale Exklusion und Exklusionsempfinden. Kölner Zeitschrift Für Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie, 58(2), 233–252.
involvement in social media
perception of exclusion
cultivation of current relationships* H4 participation
in online groups**
H5social resources***
onlin
e
offli
ne
frequency of real life activities
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
H6
*Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302. **McKenna, A. (2011). A Human Right to Participate in the Information Society. New York: Hampton Press.
** Bude, H., & Lantermann, E.-D. (2006). Soziale Exklusion und Exklusionsempfinden. Kölner Zeitschrift Für Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie, 58(2), 233–252.
general subjective well-being
perception of exclusion
H8social ressources
(offline* & online**) as important components
involvement in social media
H7position within
society*** as important component
onlin
e
offli
ne
△ individualism*
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
H9
*Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations. Sage Publications , Thousand Oaks.**Krasnova, Hanna, and Natasha F. Veltri. "Behind the curtains of privacy calculus on social networking sites: the study of Germany and the USA." 10th International Conference on
Wirtschaftsinformatik. Zurich, Switzerland, 2011.
differences on self-disclosure (trust)
between U.S. and German
social media users**
social media usage△ uncertainty avoidance* on
line
Profile of respondents:
• 85% undergraduates, 64% 20-22 years
• 73% use the Internet for > 4 years
• 75% use the Internet on a daily base
• 94% have a social media account - mainly on Facebook
U.S. students (2013) Online survey n=490
German students (2014) Online Survey
n=168
Testing H1-H8: Structural Equation Modelling Testing H9: Multiple Group Analysis
digital natives
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
positive negative
Involvement in social media
Perception of exclusion
Involvement in real life activities
positive negative
Digital Life Real Life
emotional outcome
well-being in general
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
offli
ne
onlin
e
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
positive (R2=0.524***)
negative (R2=n.s.)
Involvement in social media
Perception of exclusion
(R2=0.940***)
Involvement in real life activities
(R2=n.s.)
positive (R2=0.284***)
negative (R2=0.294***)
Digital Life Real Life
emotional outcome
well-being in general
0.724*** 0.168*** -0.124**
0.206**
0.179***
-0.236***
-0.232**
0.375***
0.523***
-0.186*
0.189***
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
positive (R2=0.524***)
negative (R2=n.s.)
Involvement in social media
Perception of exclusion
(R2=0.940***)
Involvement in real life activities
(R2=n.s.)
positive (R2=0.284***)
negative (R2=0.294***)
Digital Life Real Life
emotional outcome
well-being in general
0.724*** 0.168*** -0.124**
0.206**
0.179***
-0.236***
-0.232**
0.375***
0.523***
-0.186*
0.189***
***p<0.001 **p<0.01 *p<0.05 n.s. p>0.05
!Value (Chi-squared) 1325.984Degrees of Freedom (df)
542
P-Value 0.0000Chi-squared/ df 2.45RMSEA 0.050CFI 0.915TLI 0.906SRMR 0.066
Model fit
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
positive (R2=0.524***)
negative (R2=n.s.)
Involvement in social media
Perception of exclusion
(R2=0.940***)
Involvement in real life activities
(R2=n.s.)
positive (R2=0.284***)
negative (R2=0.294***)
emotional outcome
well-being in general
0.724*** 0.168***
Negative emotional outcomes are less influenced by involvement in social media.
H1
✔
Digital Life Real Life
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
positive (R2=0.524***)
negative (R2=n.s.)
Involvement in social media
Perception of exclusion
(R2=0.940***)
Involvement in real life activities
(R2=n.s.)
positive (R2=0.284***)
negative (R2=0.294***)
emotional outcome
well-being in general
0.189***
-0.124**
Positive emotional outcomes of social media use do not influence subjective well-being significantly.
H2
✔
Digital Life Real Life
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
positive (R2=0.524***)
negative (R2=n.s.)
Involvement in social media
Perception of exclusion
(R2=0.940***)
Involvement in real life activities
(R2=n.s.)
Positive (R2=0.284***)
Negative (R2=0.294***)
emotional outcome
well-being in general
There is no estimated significant influence between involvement in social media an real social life activities.
H3✗
Digital Life Real Life
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
Positive (R2=0.524***)
Negative (R2=n.s.)
Involvement in social media
Perception of exclusion
(R2=0.940***)
Involvement in real life activities
(R2=n.s.)
Positive (R2=0.284***)
negative (R2=0.294***)
emotional outcome
well-being in general
0.179***
Individuals’ perception of exclusion is positive enhanced by involvement in social media.
And it is reduced by real life activities.
H4
-0.232**
H5✔
Digital Life Real Life
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
positive (R2=0.524***)
negative (R2=n.s.)
Involvement in social media
Perception of exclusion
(R2=0.940***)
Involvement in real life activities
(R2=n.s.)
positive (R2=0.284***)
negative (R2=0.294***)
emotional outcome
well-being in general
0.375***
Positive well-being status in real life is significantly affected by involvement in real life activities, but not the negative well-being.
H6✔
Digital Life Real Life
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
Positive (R2=0.524***)
Negative (R2=n.s.)
Involvement in social media
Perception of exclusion
(R2=0.940***)
Involvement in real life activities
(R2=n.s.)
positive (R2=0.284***)
negative (R2=0.294***)
Digital Life Real Life
emotional outcome
well-being in general
0.206**
-0.186*
Both, positive and negative well-being are influenced by involvement in social media.
H7
✔
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
positive (R2=0.524***)
negative (R2=n.s.)
Involvement in social media
Perception of exclusion
(R2=0.940***)
Involvement in real life activities
(R2=n.s.)
positive (R2=0.284***)
negative (R2=0.294***)
emotional outcome
well-being in general
-0.236*** 0.523***
Digital Life Real Life
Individuals’ perception of exclusion reduces positive well-being and increases negative well-being.
H8✔
Intercept/ MeansGerman students
(compared to U.S. students)
Involvement in social media -1.181***Positive emotional outcome of social media involvement 0.346*
Negative emotional outcome of social media involvement n.s
Involvement in real life activities 1.048***Perception of exclusion -1.051***positive subjective well-being -1.046***negative subjective well-being n.s.
H9✔ Compared to U.S. students German students …
… are less involved in social media but more involved in real life activities. … feel less excluded. … have lower positive well-being status.
RelationshipU.S.
studentsGerman students
Sign. (z-value)
H1 Involvement in SM —>
Positive emotional outcome
0.735*** 0.674*** Δ sign. (z= -0.009)
Involvement in SM —>
Negative emotional outcome
n.s. 0.298** Δ sign.
H2 Positive emotional outcome —>
positive general well-being
0.158** n.s. Δ sign.
Negative emotional outcome —>
positive general well-being
0.134* n.s. Δ sign.
Negative emotional outcome —>
negative general well-being
0.241*** n.s. Δ sign.
H4 Involvement in SM —>
perception of exclusion
0.101* n.s. Δ sign.
H5 Involvement in real life activities —>
perception of exclusion
0.218** n.s. Δ sign.
RelationshipU.S.
studentsGerman students
Sign. (z-value)
H1 Involvement in SM —>
Positive emotional outcome
0.735*** 0.674*** Δ sign. (z= -0.009)
Involvement in SM —>
Negative emotional outcome
n.s. 0.298** Δ sign.
H2 Positive emotional outcome —>
positive general well-being
0.158** n.s. Δ sign.
Negative emotional outcome —>
positive general well-being
0.134* n.s. Δ sign.
Negative emotional outcome —>
negative general well-being
0.241*** n.s. Δ sign.
H4 Involvement in SM —>
perception of exclusion
0.101* n.s. Δ sign.
H5 Involvement in real life activities —>
perception of exclusion
0.218** n.s. Δ sign.
H9
✔The influence form involvement in social media on positive emotional outcome is stronger for U.S. students.
The influence from involvement in social media on negative emotional outcomes is only significant for German students.
In general, most relationships are only significant for U.S. students.
INTRODUCTION ⎜ THEORY ⎜ DATA ⎜ RESULTS ⎜ DISCUSSION
… in a nutshell 1. Involvement in social media results more in positive emotional
outcomes than in negative ones. 2. There is no direct significant impact of social media
involvement on real life activities. 3. German students tend to separate between online and offline
sphere more strongly.
… could be better!? 1. Student sample as a representation of digital natives? 2. A third group for testing cultural differences would be useful. 3. Longitudinal research design is needed to test for directions of
hypotheses (casualty).