fredag 22 november 2013

Theme 3: Research and theory

Study: The Benefits of Facebook ‘‘Friends:’’ Social Capital and College Students’ Use of Online Social Network Sites
By: Nicole B. Ellison Charles Steinfield & Cliff Lampe.
Published in: Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Volume 12Issue      4pages 1143–1168July 2007.
Journals Impact factor: 1.778 
JCMC 5 year impact factor: 4.748.
According to Google Scholar, it has been cited 3030 times.
The study examines the relationship between Facebook and the formation (bridging and bonding) and maintenance of social capital. Social capital is an elastic term with a variety of definitions but one of them is being defined as the resources accumulated through the relationships among people (Coleman, 1988)
 286 undergraduate students at Michigan State University (MSU) completed a survey where 268 (94%) where Facebook members. They where asked about their Facebook intensity, usage, use of Facebook to meet new people, self-esteem, and satisfaction with their life at MSU. Factors like bridging-, bonding-, and maintained social capital were also measured from questions they answered. The results from the survey were analyzed using regression analysis, and suggested a strong association between Facebook and bridging-, bonding-, and maintained social capital. Another finding was Facebook ability to influence psychological well-being and it was suggested that users with low life satisfaction and low self-esteem could benefit using Facebook to gain and maintain social capital.
The study is based on a single survey done on mostly white college students. College is a time when you meet a lot of new people and therefore the surveyees’ might be more prone to add new friends to Facebook. A longitudinal study would be preferable to see if the results vary after college. Maybe more surveys should be completed in different contexts. It’s also not unthinkable that the surveyees’ misjudged how much they use Facebook.
1. The meaning of theory differs in different disciplinary areas but it strives to logically explain why and how something occur. It also can in some cases give predictions about what the future holds.According to Sutton, data, lists of variables and constructs, diagrams and hypotheses can be part of a theory but used separately, they usually can’t support a theory by themselves.

2,3 The theory presented by N.B Ellison, C. Steinfield & C. Lampe is that the use of social network sites can benefit individuals’ social capital. I would consider the theory to be of type 1 – Analysis. The authors conclude their findings demonstrate a connection between the use of Facebook and social capital. The study is conducted followed by an analysis of the result, which makes it fit the template for type 1. Since the study is based on one single survey it’s hard for the researcher to draw general conclusions that could work universally, but they give advice to future research to use multiple methodologies to overcome this studies limitations.

2 kommentarer:

  1. Hej Martin!

    Interesting article you found. Facebook can be a great tool to maintain and keep up with friendships, but I am not so sure that I agree with recommendations of the authors to the students with low life-satisfaction and low self-esteem.

    I have read articles in the newspaper about studies showing that Facebook can quite contrary make users feel even more isolated, and add social stress, as they read about all the cool and fun things their FB-friends do with other people.

    Did they have any findings stating that these low-self esteem people did in fact gain friendships, connections and self-esteem using Facebook?

    As you say yourself; college/university is a great place to meet new people, we just all need to try to push our confidence to reach out to some new people "In Real Life".

    SvaraRadera
  2. Hi Martin!

    Since I chose the same paper, I was really interested in reading your blog post. I also argued that the theory type used in this paper is the analysis. But during the seminars we discussed that it is mainly analysis, and that it could also be explaining or prediction. Do you agree with that? Was it difficult for you to define what kind of theory type it was?

    SvaraRadera