Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
The Ohio State University, 154 North Oval Mall, Columbus, OH 43210-1339, USA
The Research Institute, Nationwide Childrens Hospital, 575 Childrens Crossroad, WB5K10, Columbus, OH 43215, USA
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Available online 24 December 2014
Keywords:
Social networking sites
Social comparison
Jealousy
Relationship conict
Privacy management
Facebook addiction
a b s t r a c t
Research on social media typically focuses on its benets; considerably less is known about the dark side
of social networking sites. Focus groups of adult Facebook users (N = 44) uncovered narratives surrounding individuals negative psychological and relational experiences tied to the social networking site and
its affordances (e.g., connectivity, visibility, accessibility, persistence, and social feedback). Thematic analysis rendered ve themes regarding Facebook stressors: managing inappropriate or annoying content, being
tethered, lack of privacy and control, social comparison and jealousy, and relationship tension and conict.
Results demonstrate that although Facebook users often experience negative emotions, they feel
pressured to access the site frequently due to the fear of missing out and to keep up with relationship
maintenance demands. Some participants reported privacy violations due to Facebooks visibility, connectivity, and persistence. These features also afforded constant social comparison to other network
members, which triggered jealousy, anxiety, and other negative emotions. Relational turbulence occurred
due to the public nature of conict on Facebook. Many participants responses revealed overarching contradictions: initially they claimed Facebook was inconsequential, yet later recounted signicant stressful
or hurtful events associated with Facebook. Our ndings indicate some methods may not uncover the
actual nature or scope of users experiences.
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Social networking websites (SNSs) have become an integral
medium for communicating within and about interpersonal relationships. Facebook is the most dominant SNS in the U.S. and over
one billion people worldwide possess an active Facebook account
(Facebook, 2014). Over two-thirds of U.S. Facebook users visit the
site at least once per day and are connected to an average of 338
friends (Pew Research Center, 2014).
One reason Facebook is the most popular social networking site
is the scope of affordances it provides for users. The ability to
connect with ones ofine network onlineas well as make new
connections onlineallows users to communicate easily with network members. Through the posting and sharing functions, social
information is easily distributed and stored among members; users
can also provide feedback to this information in the form of com Corresponding author at: 3084 Derby Hall, 154 North Oval Mall, Columbus, OH
43210-1339, USA. Tel.: +1 (614) 247 2348.
E-mail addresses: fox.775@osu.edu (J. Fox), jennifer.moreland@nationwide
childrens.org (J.J. Moreland).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.083
0747-5632/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
ments and likes. Facebook also offers the convenience of network-wide, group, and private communication channels through
one interface. Further, Facebook has a mobile application, ensuring
that users can access the site easily from their devices. Collectively,
these affordances explain why Facebook has grown and maintained a devoted user base globally.
Although considerable research has focused on the benets of
using SNSs such as increased social capital, social support, and
relationship maintenance (e.g., Ellison, Steineld, & Lampe, 2007;
McEwan, 2013; Nabi, Prestin, & So, 2013), fewer studies have
examined the nature of negative outcomes for adult users. Given
that users expect positive outcomes and often visit SNSs for relaxation, entertainment, or social connection (Ku, Chu, & Tseng, 2013;
Park, Kee, & Valenzuela, 2009), users may not anticipate negative
experiences or interactions, making them more potent or hurtful.
At this time, some survey-based research has identied links
between Facebook use and diminished well-being (e.g., Chen &
Lee, 2013; Chou & Edge, 2012; Kross et al., 2013), as well as negative experiences based on unfriending and romantic relationship
dissolution (Bevan, Ang, & Fearns, 2014; Fox, Jones, & Lookadoo,
2013; Marshall, 2012; Tokunaga, 2014). Further, a recent content
169
170
3.2. Participants
Participants (N = 44) were 17 men and 27 women who were taking one or more classes at a large Midwestern university and ranged
in age from 19 to 52 (M = 23.36, SD = 6.79). Some were offered extra
credit in exchange for their participation, whereas others participated without compensation. They identied as White/European/
European-American (52.3%), Asian/Asian-American (20.5%),
Multiracial (6.8%), Latino/a (2.3%), Middle Eastern (2.3%), and seven
did not report their race/ethnicity due to a clerical error. All those
reporting sexual orientation stated they were heterosexual. Only
one participant reported she did not currently use Facebook, but
had been a regular user until six months prior. Her data was
retained in the analyses as she effectively responded to questions
regarding her prior use. Otherwise, all participants possessed an
active Facebook account. They reported having their prole an average of 3.55 years (SD = 1.90) and spent an average of 1.56 h
(SD = 1.63) each day actively using Facebook (i.e., not just logged
in, but using the interface). This use is notably higher than Facebooks recent report that users spend 40 min a day on the site
(Brustein, 2014).
3.3. Analysis
Twelve same-sex groups ranging in size from three to ve participants were analyzed. We conducted same-sex groups because,
as Lindolf and Taylor (2011) note, a homogeneous group is usually
more willing to speak openly (p. 186). We engaged in an open
coding process and then completed in vivo coding (Corbin &
Strauss, 2008) to identify the terms participants chose to describe
their experiences (e.g., creeping, TMI, friend sluts). Through iterations of the data, a constant-comparative method was applied to
identify, elaborate, and clarify categories (Corbin & Strauss,
2008). Emergent categories were examined within and across
groups to determine salience and recurrence. After a training process, the rst and second authors individually coded each group
and identied common themes across groups to achieve investigator triangulation (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Common themes were
identied within each of the 12 focus groups.
3.1. Procedure
4. Results
Focus groups were conducted in two sessions. The inclusion of a
second wave of data enabled triangulation via member validation
and negative case analysis (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Furthermore,
we established diachronic reliability, as we found no noted differences in participant testimonies from one group of sessions to the
other (Miles & Huberman, 1994). All groups were conducted in the
same location to maintain continuity. The research team video
171
172
Another male agreed, noting he also had ghts with his girlfriend over their one-sided Facebook interaction: She said our
wall-to-wall was embarrassing, because it was like her her her
her her, one me. Her her her her her, one me. I mean, its not that
I dont care, its just, like, I have your number. I dont need to write
on your wall. Although the male participant did not see a use for
the affordance of social feedback, his girlfriends use of the term
embarrassing indicates that she felt that his lack of response
had not just interpersonal but social signicance due to its visibility. Similarly, one female mocked other womens preoccupation
with their signicant others social feedback on Facebook over
the course of a relationship:
[First, its] Oh, he looks good in this picture, and I like his
clothes, and hes friends with his brother, and they look so nice
and then six months later, its like, I commented on his picture
two days ago and he didnt like it. WHY. [throws up hands and
drops pen dramatically, others laugh]
All of these comments indicate that although Facebook makes
relationship maintenance convenient, its perceived accessibility
and the visibility of these interactions to the social network may
foster expectations. If partners Facebook use or expectations are
not compatible, this may create conict and make relationship
maintenance on the site feel burdensome (Fox, in press).
Participants noted the maintenance of family ties on Facebook
was an additional source of interpersonal strife. Several participants related face-to-face arguments resulting from not friending
or defriending their relatives on Facebook. For example, a female
participant and her cousins were confronted at a family gathering
by their uncles new wife, who demanded to know why they had
not friended her on Facebook. In other situations, the relatives
online behavior is unpalatable. For example, a female participant
defriended her sister-in-law because she found her posts vulgar;
thus, she did not want to be visibly linked to the sister-in-law.
The rst time she saw the sister-in-law face-to-face, she was
alarmed by her reaction: We went to a wedding and she was like
[makes angry face], You defriended me on Facebook! And I was
like, I love you in real life. I dont like you on the Internet. As this
incident demonstrates, the practice of defriending may be perceived as a relational slight (Bevan, Ang et al., 2014), and this participant reported having to engage in relationship repair to salvage
their connection.
Facebook wars or comment wars represent another form of
conict participants cited wherein several discussion topics, particularly politics, could spark heated debates online through the
visible social feedback. Participants acknowledged the lack of
face-to-face conversation often resulted in the debates becoming
uncivil, and most witnessed these ghts continue ofine.
Alternatively, ofine ghts moved online. A male participant
recalled an argument with a friend about gay marriage during a
car ride. Although he thought the dispute ended, the friend later
posted about it: We got into a big thing on Facebook. It was weird
having an argument over Facebook. Like, waiting for their response
so you can say, Ha ha, thats crap. [mimics angry typing] It became
this big 30-post tirade back and forth. No matter the topic,
Facebooks visibility and connectivity allow private conicts to
become public and also enable other network members to comment on it or take sides, further fanning the ames and often producing ofine relational consequences as well.
5. Discussion and conclusion
In this study, we sought to explore the breadth and depth of
participants negative emotional experiences with a social networking site. This study revealed that SNS use can trigger many
minor and major negative emotional experiences, many of which
173
are afforded by Facebooks design. Although Facebooks affordances offer benets for sharing social information, they also present downsides. Participants in this study noted visibility can work
against users, as they see things they do not want to see.
Furthermore, their friends often share things that users wish they
would not share, and the persistence of this information can haunt
users. Although Facebook is conveniently accessible through
mobile devices, this also makes users feel tethered to the site.
Because Facebook affords constant accessibility and updating,
users fear missing out on social information if they do not check
the site regularly, creating more social labor for users. Participants
felt pressured by friends, relatives, and romantic partners to
engage in relationship maintenance on the site; accessibility created an expectation that users would respond quickly to Facebook
posts and messages. Connectivity can be great among friends and
relatives, but it can create problems when users do not want to
connect to others, want to terminate existing connections, or use
this connectivity to enable unhealthy behaviors like monitoring
an ex-partner or engaging in social comparison. Despite these negative experiences, however, all participants except one still maintained their Facebook accounts. Future research should further
explore how users weigh the psychological and relational costs
and benets of their Facebook engagement.
The use of focus groups in this study had many advantages, and
one important nding emerged that probably would not have been
evident using alternative methods. Namely, over the course of the
group discussions, the majority of participants revealed signicant
inconsistencies about their negative experiences with Facebook.
These inconsistencies included: (1) suggesting other people caused
or experienced negative events on the site, whereas they themselves did not; (2) claiming Facebook was insignicant in their
lives, but later revealing instances in which Facebook had a considerable emotional impact on them; and (3) defending their own
negative interactions on Facebook as uncontrollable, but attributing others negative interactions to personality aws. These contradictions have signicant implications for how SNS researchers
collect and interpret data about users experiences.
First, we noted a marked trend supporting the presence of the
third person effect (Davison, 1983) regarding Facebook use. Although
many participants downplayed their own negative interactions on
Facebook, they were quick to assert others posted negatively, created drama on or about Facebook, or overreacted to Facebook content. Later disclosures, however, revealed that, like their peers,
these participants were responsible for negative content or events.
A second related inconsistency was that many participants who
initially claimed Facebook was inconsequential later shared stories
in which Facebook had a signicant impact on them. Early in the
discussions, participants often decried other people making a big
deal out of Facebook or confusing it with real life, but later demonstrated Facebook was consequential and had affected them offline. One participant said it was ridiculous to get upset over
Facebook, but later relayed how she no longer talked to a close
friend over comments the friend made on Facebook. Two men both
claimed Facebook never played a role in their romantic relationships, but later each discussed how their lack of communication
with their girlfriends on Facebook caused ghts ofine. The very
same participants who claimed that Facebook was not real all
had stories to share about having negative emotions, ofine conict, or even relational termination in part because of (if not wholly
attributable to) Facebooks affordances. These ndings reinforce the
notion that although many people conceptualize them as separate
worlds, online and ofine experiences are inextricably intertwined.
A third inconsistency is emerged when participants related incidents in which they were responsible for a negative event or drama
on Facebook. Their accounts often revealed the fundamental
attribution error (Ross, 1977). Although other Facebook users posted
174
References
Bevan, J. L., Ang, P. C., & Fearns, J. B. (2014). Being unfriended on Facebook: An
application of expectancy violation theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 33,
171178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.029.
Bevan, J. L., Gomez, R., & Sparks, L. (2014). Disclosures about important life events
on Facebook: Relationships with stress and quality of life. Computers in Human
Behavior, 39, 246253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.021.
boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Social network sites: Denition, history, and
scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 210230. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1111/j/1083-6101.2007.00393.x.
Brustein, J. (2014). Americans now spend more time on Facebook than they do on
their pets. Business Week <http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-07-23/
heres-how-much-time-people-spend-on-facebook-daily> Retrieved 11.11.14.
Chen, W., & Lee, K. H. (2013). Sharing, liking, commenting, and distressed? The
pathway between Facebook interaction and psychological distress.
Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16, 728734. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0272.
Chou, H. G., & Edge, N. (2012). They are happier and having better lives than I am:
The impact of using Facebook on perceptions of others lives. Cyberpsychology,
Behavior, and Social Networking, 15, 117121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/
cyber.2011.0324.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and
procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Davison, W. P. (1983). The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion
Quarterly, 47, 115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/268763.
DeAndrea, D. C., & Walther, J. B. (2011). Attributions for inconsistencies between
online and ofine self-presentations. Communication Research, 38, 805825.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650210385340.
Ellison, N. B., Steineld, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benets of Facebook friends:
Social capital and college students use of online social network sites. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 11431168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/
j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x.
Facebook (2014). Our mission <http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/> Retrieved
14.09.14.
Feinstein, B. A., Hershenberg, R., Bhatia, V., Latack, J. A., Meuwly, N., & Davila, J.
(2013). Negative social comparison on Facebook and depressive symptoms:
Rumination as a mechanism. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 2, 161170.
Fox, J. (in press). The dark side of social networking sites in romantic relationships.
In B. K. Wiederhold, G. Riva, and P. Cipresso (Eds.), The psychology of social
networking: Communication, presence, identity, and relationships in online
communities. Versita.
Fox, J., & Anderegg, C. (2014). Romantic relationship stages and behavior on social
networking sites: Uncertainty reduction strategies and perceived norms on
Facebook. CyberPsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17, 685691. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2014.0232.
Fox, J., Jones, E. B., & Lookadoo, K. (2013). Romantic relationship dissolution on
social networking sites: Social support, coping, and rituals on Facebook. Paper
presented at the 63rd Annual Conference of the International Communication
Association, London, UK.
Fox, J., Osborn, J. L., & Warber, K. M. (2014). Relational dialectics and social
networking sites: The role of Facebook in romantic relationship escalation,
maintenance, conict, and dissolution. Computers in Human Behavior, 35,
527534. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.031.
Fox, J., & Warber, K. M. (2013). Romantic relationship development in the age of
Facebook: An exploratory study of emerging adults perceptions, motives, and
behaviors. CyberPsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16, 37. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0288.
Fox, J., & Warber, K. M. (2014). Social networking sites in romantic relationships:
Attachment,
uncertainty,
and
partner
surveillance
on
Facebook.
CyberPsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17, 37. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1089/cyber.2012.0667.
Fox, J., & Warber, K. M. (in press). Queer identity management and political selfexpression on social networking sites: A co-cultural approach to the spiral of
silence. Journal of Communication.
Fox, J., Warber, K. M., & Makstaller, D. C. (2013). The role of Facebook in romantic
relationship development: An exploration of Knapps relational stage model.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30, 772795. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1177/0265407512468370.
Gentile, B., Twenge, J. M., Freeman, E. C., & Campbell, W. K. (2012). The effect of
social networking websites on positive self-views: An experimental
investigation. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 19291933. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.chb.2012.05.012.
Gonzales, A. L. (2014). Text-based communication inuences self-esteem more than
face-to-face or cellphone communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 39,
197203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.026.
Gonzales, A. L., & Hancock, J. T. (2011). Mirror, mirror on my Facebook wall: Effects
of exposure to Facebook on self-esteem. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
Networking, 14, 7983. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0411.
175
Haferkamp, N., & Krmer, N. C. (2011). Social comparison 2.0: Examining the effects
of online proles on social-networking sites. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and
Social Networking, 14, 309314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0120.
Johnson, B. K., & Knobloch-Westerwick, S. (2014). Glancing up or down: Mood
management and selective social comparisons on social networking sites.
Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 3339. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.
09.009.
Kross, E., Verduyn, P., Demiralp, E., Park, J., Lee, D. S., Lin, N., et al. (2013). Facebook
use predicts declines in subjective well-being in young adults. PloS One, 8(8),
e69841. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0069841.
Ku, Y. C., Chu, T. H., & Tseng, C. H. (2013). Gratications for using CMC technologies:
A comparison among SNS, IM, and e-mail. Computers in Human Behavior, 29,
226234. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.08.009.
Kwan, G. C. E., & Skoric, M. M. (2013). Facebook bullying: An extension of battles in
school. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1625. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.chb.2012.07.014.
Lange, M. (2014). 59 percent of tiny children use social media. New York Magazine
<http://nymag.com/thecut/2014/02/over-half-kids-social-media-before-ageten.html> Retrieved 31.07.14.
Lee, S. Y. (2014). How do people compare themselves with others on social network
sites? The case of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 32, 253260. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.12.009.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Lindolf, T. R, & Taylor, B. C (2011). Qualitative communication research methods (3rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mao, J. (2014). Social media for learning: A mixed methods study on high school
students technology affordances and perspectives. Computers in Human
Behavior, 33, 213223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.002.
Marshall, T. C. (2012). Facebook surveillance of former romantic partners:
Associations
with
postbreakup
recovery
and
personal
growth.
Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15, 521526. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0125.
Masur, P. K., Reinecke, L., Ziegele, M., & Quiring, O. (2014). The interplay of intrinsic
need satisfaction and Facebook specic motives in explaining addictive
behavior on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 376386. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.047.
McEwan, B. (2013). Sharing, caring, and surveilling: An actorpartner
interdependence model examination of Facebook relational maintenance
strategies. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16, 863869.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0717.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Nabi, R. L., Prestin, A., & So, J. (2013). Facebook friends with (health) benets?
Exploring social network site use and perceptions of social support, stress, and
well-being. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16, 721727.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0521.
Pang, A. S. K. (2013). The distraction addiction. New York: Little, Brown.
Park, N., Kee, K. F., & Valenzuela, S. (2009). Being immersed in social networking
environment: Facebook groups, uses and gratications, and social outcomes.
Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 12, 729733. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/
cpb.2009.0003.
Petronio, S. (1991). Communication boundary management: A theoretical model of
managing disclosure of private information between marital couples.
Communication Theory, 1, 311335. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.
1991.tb00023.x.
Pew Research Center (2014). 6 new facts about Facebook <http://
www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/02/03/6-new-facts-about-facebook/>.
Przybylski, A. K., Murayama, K., DeHaan, C. R., & Gladwell, V. (2013). Motivational,
emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Computers in Human
Behavior, 29, 18411848. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.014.
Reich, S. M., Subrahmanyam, K., & Espinoza, G. (2012). Friending, IMing, and
hanging out face-to-face: Overlap in adolescents online and ofine social
networks. Developmental Psychology, 48, 356368. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
a0026980.
Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the
attribution process. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 173220.
Shelton, A. K., & Skalski, P. (2014). Blinded by the light: Illuminating the dark side of
social network use through content analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 33,
339348. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.08.017.
Sutcliffe, A. G., Gonzalez, V., Binder, J., & Nevarez, G. (2011). Social mediating
technologies: Social affordances and functionalities. International Journal of
Human-Computer Interaction, 27, 10371065. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
10447318.2011.555318.
Tokunaga, R. S. (2014). Relational transgressions on social networking sites:
Individual, interpersonal, and contextual explanations for dyadic strain and
communication rules change. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 287295.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.024.
Toma, C. L., & Hancock, J. T. (2013). Self-afrmation underlies Facebook use.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 321331. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1177/0146167212474694.
Treem, J., & Leonardi, P. (2012). Social media use in organizations: Exploring the
affordances of visibility, editability, persistence, and association. Communication
Yearbook, 36, 143189.
Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from
each
other.
New
York:
Basic
Books.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
13691180801999050.
176
Utz, S., & Beukeboom, C. J. (2011). The role of social network sites in romantic
relationships: Effects on jealousy and relationship happiness. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 16, 511527. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/
j.1083-6101.2011.01552.x.
Valenzuela, S., Park, N., & Kee, K. F. (2008). Is there social capital in a social network
site?: Facebook use and college students life satisfaction, trust, and
participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 875901.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01474.x.
Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., & Sinagub, J. (1996). Focus group interviews in education
and psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal,
interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23,
343. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365096023001001.
Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital
empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24,
18161836. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.012.