In this essay for Introduction and theoretical foundations to new media, I will try to give an overview of user attachment with internet, especially social networks and the idea of connecting users.
I work for a online social network service , that is made for people who want to share and show their joy, happiness and sorrow connected with their dogs and cats.
Many people use online social networks to communicate with their real-life friends or to keep track of them (where they are and what they do).
Belonging is one of the main needs that people have. Belonging gives people safety and makes them feel good. Groups are often formed based on similar characteristics, either by work, school, family or hobbies – parachute jumping, classical music, art, or views – political, green thinking, animal rescuing or nationality - all kinds of imaginable and unimaginable things. Internet groups as social groups give people feeling of belonging and according to Wellmann et al (2001) it increases people's social capital, increasing contact with friends and relatives who live nearby and far away. Those who seek social support from online groups tend to do it anonymously, it gives them benefits but is also challenging as its different from face to face communication. Usefulness of online health support groups have been researched by White & Dorman (2001) who found that these kind of online groups formed either on special webpages or randomly inside bigger social networks, give support, help in recovery and build self-esteem.
Pfeil & Zaphiris (2009) research showed that supportive messages are often sent in private as at the same time seeking of support is often happening in public forum. Trying to get attention to one's situation in public forum gives greater probablity that those who care see the message and get in contact. On the other hand if you give support privately it gives personal feeling and touch that the person who sent the message actually cares and does not just through words in wind.
Most popular websites are basically online social networks, but this has not always been this way. Gennardo & Dutton (2007) say initial studies were sceptical about the utility of people using the Internet to create meaningful social relationships, due to the anonymity, lack of cues and lower social presence provided by the Internet. Moreover, the widespread diffusion and heavy use of personal computers and the Internet generated concern over the degree that time spent online would substitute for time spent in face to face social interaction; thus, attention shifted to whether Internet use would increase or decrease sociability.
Not all online community members make friends online, but still about 20 per cent does (Gennardo & Dutton, 2007). And from these people many are likely to meet in real life as well.
Gennardo and Dutton (2007) study investigates the extent to which the Internet is used in ways that reconfigure social networks among Internet users in Britain. The findings support the view that the Internet is establishing itself as a powerful tool for the formation of new social relationships by enabling some individuals to meet new people and make new friends, whom otherwise they would not have met. The findings will help move the debate away from the binary issues of whether the Internet undermines or reinforces offline social ties by redirecting attention to the qualitative changes in social networks tied to use of the Internet.
To make friends online a person needs to have something to start with - something in common.
Once people meet online they pass through other channels of communication before going on to meeting face to face, such as by exchanging photos of each other (Gennardo and Dutton, 2007). Feeling of truthfulness or deception becomes really important whether people decide to continue communication (Galanxhi & Fui-Noon Nah, 2007). Deception is not only pretending to someone else but also talking and refleting personal views that one actually does not have (McDevitt et al, 2003). Anonymous communication where one feels like no one can touch her/him gives the change to talk whatever you think about or agree to things that they do not agree in real life.
Shuen (2008, p 73) says that while online networking is becoming more and more common and first impression is more made online, we should not forget the skills we have from offline world as they become useful online as well. Online gives the chance to skip the small-talk and polite introductions and stick to the important, common or fun things quickly.
Gennardo & Dutton (2007) remind traditional theories of relationship development where physical and geographical proximity and information about the physical appearance and social group membership of individuals were necessary pre-conditions for social relationships to develop. Therefore, the anonymity and the lack of non-verbal cues of computer-mediated communication were believed to be inimical to the formation of authentic and meaningful online relationships. It seems these social theories are crashed. Are they really?
Avatars are virtual faces for online community members. How much they matter depend on different people. The virtual face can be similar with the person or can represent something totally different from cartoon pictures to deliberately pretending to be someone else.
People who tend to be deceiving online are more anxious, but using an avatar that is different from themselves helps to reduce the anxiety (Galanxhi & Fui-Hoon Nah, 2007). Probably it helps to draw away from deceiving as one is pretending to be someone else.
But "seeing" the person who you are communicating also increases trust and helps to imagine the person behind the other screen, what words to choose and what to talk about.
People who can't find "others like them" use online communities and groups. In there they feel that they can be heard and there are others who think alike. Minorities have also more self confidence to discuss the topics they care about in public forums. McDevitt et al (2003) found that those people who belonged to minority group tended to speak up more than majority. It probably shows that when it is hard to be heard in "real life", then online gives the chance to write about the things you actually think and share your opinions.
A research that was made in University of Sidney found a positive association between a sense of belonging to an online community, sense of community, and well-being. Seniors' use of the Internet for communication and information, and the frequency and history of their Internet use, were consistently related to a greater sense of community (Shima et al 2009). At the same time Pfeil and Zaphiris (2009) talk about emphatic online community for older people. They find in their study that emotional discussions have a strong connection with bringing people closer to each other and associates with strong connections between members of online social network.
The biggest social network in the market is undoubtedly Facebook. According to recent article in Techrunch Facebook is the fourth largest site in the world, it has grown more than 150 per cent during last year. These are amazing numbers. This kind of social network would not function only on the people who try to contact the people they already know from real world, but they must make new connections between fanatic users every day.
Simplicity is the key behind web based communities. Every user has to find something. Although commonly suggested idea behind businesses is “you can’t be liked by everyone”, it seems that the key factor behind being successful in virtual market, IS being liked by everyone independent on age, gender, hobbies, nation etc.
Affecting younger or older people
Presumably teenagers are active online surfers. Teenagers spend much time behind computer. If their time behind computer is organized well they can also be taught to act differently. Valaitis and O'Mara (2005) study of how teenagers behaviour can be changed by supportive online community organized by school showed positive results. Eight and seventh graders were part of a community development project that planned and implemented actions to improve their social environment.
E-health community have been used with teen-age girls to see if it has influence on their calcium consumption and high-impact activity. DeBar et al (2009) found that it has influence but also found that teenagers tend to visit more the websites "fun" part with activities and fun facts, this shows that teenagers need extra content to be hooked but teaching or changing behaviour through online network affects everyday life positively.
Teenagers are curious to learn new skills and their technical skills are most likely up for challenges. Looking at online communities for older people, it is important that they are simple. Seniors are open-minded looking for support and communicating with others through internet (Pfeil & Saphiris, 2009; Shima et al. 2009) but they might first need extra help to get started with it.
Who are active
Activeness can be seen from different angles, for example how many connections a user has with others. Depending on the connections and past activities – forum posts, comments, pattings etc, new users make decision on older users. According to Tom Tong et al (2008). With the advent of new social technologies, users no longer have to rely on an individual’s self-composed emails, chat statements, or personal web pages to garner impressions about a subject. Users employ strategies unique to CMC (Computer mediated communication) including browsing archived transcripts of discussions and chats, surfing personal and institutional web sites, or using search engines to uncover a variety of information repositories (e.g. ‘‘googling’’).
It is common that people "google" their new acquaintances to know more about them. People know that almost everything you do online can be saved and looked up by others. Someones' sport results or marital status are often pretty quick to be found.
We have more information than ever before and tend to build a society where we do not have enough time to sit back and think. Else & Turkle (2006) talk about teenagers who grow up not knowing what it means not to have a cellphone in pocket and hundred people on your online network list. Taking decision on if a new person you meet online or real world is worth to communicate with is done really fast. We also tend to trust the information our friends give us (Wellmann, 2001) either online or if we see that a person who wants to communicate with us is already a friend with some of "my friends" then we trust the new person more than a stranger we do not have any connection with.
Getting to know the people online is really important. It is good to have popular friends but at the same time, if someone has too many friend connections than other users start to think „doesn’t this person have a real life“. This assumption is also confirmed by Tom Tong et al in their study from Facebook by this social judgements are made.
Social ties in online social groups allow to use different communication channels for bug reporting to let web-page developers know what is happening and what is expected to be fixed or changed. According to Mayer-Schönberger (2009) peer groups behind open-source software work this way often, where most are bug reporters and few are actual developers. The system is built on connections between those who want to contribute and be part of development even if it means just letting the real makers know about bugs.
User Engagement
According to presentation of Social Networking Statistics and Trends people spent about 12 minutes in Facebook in the beginning of last (2008) year. This is considered pretty long time. During the time users check their own profile and friends profiles. This number means that many users actually spend much more time on the page, as the average time is brought down by those who just go there for a moment to click to some pages.
According to same presentation MySpace users spent time on the site has dropped from 2007. While it was more than 27 minutes in June 2007, it has dropped to less than 20 minutes in May 2008.
Today according to Alexa statistics, user spends 27 minutes in Facebook. So the time people spend on Social network is long, but why they do it in the first place. I would not like to consider the reasons why companies join and use social networks, but concentrate on why single person actually wants to spend time in social network. From different articles I found these things:
1. Helps to keep in touch with friends and acquaintances
2. To be popular
3. To hide from real life
4. to connect with others in ones’ profession
5. Online Social Networks have made the web exciting again.
6. Social Networks Make Life Easier.
7. To connect with others with same hobbies
8. To connect with others with similar life experiences
9. Learn useful skills (Valaitis & O'Mara, 2005)
10. Change and get support of learning (Valaitis & O'Mara, 2005)
Conclusion
Using internet Today, means that one is also using online social networks. Even if you are not an official member there, you see and hear all about it. Using online social networks to communicate with real life friends and find new ones, is common for different age groups. At the same time something useful has to come out of it for members. Finding support or other similar people is simple online, as geographical and physical barriers are vanished.
It is important to keep social network member interested and while hooking different age groups, different details are needed to be considered.
The challenge for this generation is to think of sociality as more than the cyber-intimacy of sharing gossip and photographs and profiles (Else and Turkle 2006, 49).
Sources:
1. Debar, L. L., Dickerson, J., Clarke, G., Stevens, V. J., Ritenbaugh, C., Aickin, M. (2009) Using a website to build community and enhance outcomes in a group, multi-component intervention promoting healthy diet and exercise in adolescents, Pediatric Psychology, 34 (5): 539
2. Di Gennardo, C., Dutton, W. H. (2007). Reconfiguring friendships Social relationships and the Internet, Information, Communication & Society, Vol. 10 Issue 5
3. Else, L., Turkle, S. (2006) Living online: I'll have to ask my friends, 20. september 2006, NewScientistTech
4. Galanxhi, H., Fui-Noon Nah, F. (2007) Deception in Cyberspace: A comparison of text-only vs avatar-supported medium, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies Vol 65, Issue 9, September 2007, pages 770-783
5. Macmanus, R., (2007) Facebook Frows Up – An Analysis of Today’s News, May 24, 2007, http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebook_grows_up.php
6. Mayer-Schönberger, V. (2009). Can we reinvent the Internet , Science, Vol 325, 24. July
7. McDevitt, M., Kiousis, S., Wahl-Jorgensen, K. (2003) Spiral of Moderation: Opinion expression in Computer Mediated Discussion, International Journal of Public opinion Research Vol. 15 No 4
8. Pfeil, U., Saphiris, P. (2009) Investigating social network patterns within an empathic online community for older people, Computers in Human Behavior 25 (2009) 1139-1155
9. Shima, M. R. Mark, P. Mohsen, H. Ian (2009). Internet Use as a Predictor of Sense of Community in Older People, CybersPsychology & Behavior; Apr 2009, Vol. 12 Issue 2
10.Shuen, A. (2008) Web 2.0 A Strategy Guide; Published by O'Reilly Media, Inc. 2008
11. Tom Tong, S. Van Der Heide, B. Langwell, L., Walther, J. B. (2008) Too much of a good thing? The relationship between Number of Friends and Interpersonal Impressions on Facebook, Journal of Computer-mediated Communication, 13
12. Valaitis, R., O'Mara, L. (2005) Enabling youth Participation in School-based computer-supported community development in Canada, Health Promotion International 20(3)
13. Wellmann, B. (2001). Computer Networks as Social Networks, Science 14 September 2001 293: 2031-2034
14. White, M., Dorman, S. M. (2001) Receiving social support online: implications for health education, Health Education Research Vol. 16 no. 6
