In what way does Facebook add value to our social capital? Literature review Social networks are a set part of most our daily life’s. Most of us probably also perceive it as beneficial and a positive addition. But do we really use this tool in the most effective way, increasing our social capital – a construct describing the total resources in our networks (Vitak & Ellison 2012)-to the maximum?
I am interested in the return on Investment, that we actually receive using these social networking sites, specifically looking into the usage of Facebook, as most of my personal social networking takes place on this specific social networking platform. The early study of Ellison et al. (2007) examined the ability of maintaining social capital while moving to another community. Studying Facebook users they found, that controversially to previous observations of researchers, social networks were not necessarily exclusively an online community, but could also be an offline to online community (Ellison et al. 007).
\
This built the base for further research on the impact of social networking on social life. Credibility of this survey is limited due to the small sample size (N=286) and its demographic monotony, where only surveys among college students were conducted (Ellison et al. 2007).
The Term Paper on Impact Of Social Networking Sites On Society
Dr.M.K.kulshreshtha, SD College of Management, Israna, Panipat, India Kapil Kumar, SD College of Management, Israna, Panipat, Sumiti Sehgal SD College of Management, Israna, Panipat, Abstract Social networking sites such as Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter are amongst the most popular destinations on the web. No doubt in some cases this has contributed to Internet Addiction Disorder, but have they ...
The survey was executed during the entry phase of Facebook, which makes its causality vague. When talking about social capital most researchers differ between bonding and bridging social capital (Ellison et al. 2007, Jung et al. 2013, Burke et al. 011).
Bridging social capital provides insight to novel information, which presents us with different perspectives and opinions, usually spread by broadcasting information to a wide audience or passive consumption of such information. Bonding social capital provides us with emotional and comforting responses of closer friends and family; it is affected by direct communication with other individuals (Burke et al. 2011).
Burke et al. (2011) found that the relationship between bonding social capital and the usage of Facebook is weak.
This is reasoned as online communication adds little value to relationships that are mainly built on daily face-to-face interaction (Burke et al. 2011).
Bridging social capital of people with low self-esteem and low communication skills is positively related to passive communication, whereas people with average or above skills in these areas are not affected by it. Additionally has the receiving, not sending of messages, a positive linkage to bridging social capital (Burke et al. 2011).
I picked this source because of its high credibility.
The researchers made use of behavioural logs instead of personal evaluation, to prevent biased data. Opposed to most research on this topic they used an eight-month longitudinal, not cross sectional panel design and had a random sample of 419 participants (Burke et al. 2011).
Hence it is high in validity. Further research, by Vitak and Ellison (2012) deals with perceptions of the users and their stimulations to the usage of Facebook. The qualitative data adds privacy concerns of the users to the discussion. Lack of knowledge about privacy policies and tools may lead to less engagement on the social network.
The Term Paper on The Facebook Relationship Status
Quick, Check Facebook to See if He’s Single! Changes in relationships are managed by Facebook because they are used as indicators and social markers of availability, pride and emotion. By examining these indicators we can explore the dynamics of communication from a social networking perspective. Communication cues such as metamessages, verbal and non-verbal communication and the conversation ...
The users must find a balance between their concern for privacy and the willingness to engage (Vitak & Ellison 2012).
Due to the sample size of 18 the outcomes are limited in generalization and I find them to be rather generic. However I do believe an insight into the stimulating values of the user is important in order to understand the usage itself. Jung et al. (2013) introduced Williams’ Internet Social Capital Scales into the study of Facebook. This scale divides social capital into five dimensions, namely emotional support, access to limited resources, ability to mobilize solidarity, out-group antagonism and homogeneity.
They measure social capital by the number of responses a participant receives, following a public call on Facebook for a favour, everyone in their friend list could fulfil. This study found that neither bridging nor bonding social capital had a positive affect on the number of responses. The users intention of meeting new people via Facebook had a negative relation to the number of responses. On the other side, the usage of Facebook for individual benefit (bonding) had a positive relationship to the number of responses (Jung et al. 013) Moreover did the users that asked their network for favours with a higher frequency, have a higher response rate. It is assumed that these people engage more with their Facebook network, hence have higher bridging capital (Jung et al. 2013).
The credibility of this source is limited by its sample size (N=98) and the cross sectional style. Furthermore were the researchers not able to control the display of the message within the system. In conclusion we see that we not only have to differentiate between characteristics of the users and the usage but also between the different outcomes.
