Social media, rituals, and long-distance family relationship maintenance: A mixed-methods systematic review

For families with limited opportunities for face-to-face interaction, social media can be a vital communication medium to help shape the family identity, maintain bonds, and accomplish shared tasks. This mixed-methods systematic review of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method empirical studies published between 1997 and 2019 uses a convergent data-based framework to explore how long-distance families engage in family practices using various modes of social media. Fifty-one papers were synthesized into four domains: (1) doing family in a social media environment, (2) performing family through stories and rituals, (3) the nature of online communication practices, and (4) privacy, conflict, and the quality of family relationships. Given the value of patterned routines to families, research into the role of family kinkeepers is suggested. Finally, families use chat (messages) extensively for both assuring behaviour and conflict resolution so further investigation of the impact of this asynchronous mode is recommended.

[1]  Michelle Share,et al.  Displaying and performing: Polish transnational families in Ireland Skyping grandparents in Poland , 2018, New Media Soc..

[2]  Kristel Anne F. Acedera,et al.  Renegotiating migration experiences: Indonesian domestic workers in Singapore and use of information communication technologies , 2016, New Media Soc..

[3]  Mirca Madianou,et al.  Smartphones as Polymedia , 2014, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[4]  S. Zarit,et al.  Transnational Support of Asian Indian Elderly in India: Examining Patterns of Exchanges , 2015, Care Management Journals.

[5]  G. Bacigalupe,et al.  Emerging Technologies and Family Communication: The Case of International Students , 2017 .

[6]  E. Cabalquinto.  Home on the move: negotiating differential domesticity in family life at a distance , 2018 .

[7]  Mirca Madianou.  Ambient co-presence: transnational family practices in polymedia environments , 2016 .

[8]  C. Rosenthal,et al.  Kinkeeping in the Familial Division of Labor , 1985 .

[9]  Sharon L. Storch,et al.  The role of mobile devices in 21st-century family communication , 2019, Mobile Media & Communication.

[10]  S. F. Shaker.  A Study of Transnational Communication Among Iranian Migrant Women in Australia , 2018 .

[11]  E. Cabalquinto.  Mobilities, Communication, and Asia| “I Have Always Thought of My Family First”: An Analysis of Transnational Caregiving Among Filipino Migrant Adult Children in Melbourne, Australia , 2018 .

[12]  Beyond the cultural dichotomy, what do we share?: An ethnographic study of intergenerational smartphone MMS use in sojourning experiences , 2015 .

[13]  Cecilia Gordano Peile,et al.  Immigrants and mobile phone uses: Spanish-speaking young adults recently arrived in London , 2016 .

[14]  Sunny S. K. Lam,et al.  ICT's impact on family solidarity and upward mobility in translocal China , 2013 .

[15]  M. Nishitani.  Kinship, gender, and communication technologies: Family dramas in the Tongan diaspora , 2014 .

[16]  Katheryn C. Maguire,et al.  Cultural and Transnational Influences on the Use of Information Communication Technologies in Adult Long-Distance Family Relationships: An Extension of Media Multiplexity Theory , 2018, Journal of Family Communication.

[18]  Paula Pustułka.  Virtual Transnationalism: Polish Migrant Families and New Technologies , 2015 .

[19]  Laura Stafford.  Romantic and Parent-Child Relationships at a Distance , 2004 .

[20]  Jessica Vitak,et al.  Facebook makes the heart grow fonder: relationship maintenance strategies among geographically dispersed and communication-restricted connections , 2014, CSCW.

[21]  Susan Salmond,et al.  Chapter 8: Mixed Methods Systematic Reviews , 2019, JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis.

[22]  Madeline E. Smith,et al.  Going to college and staying connected: communication between college freshmen and their parents , 2012, CSCW.

[23]  B. Yeoh,et al.  ‘Making time’: Long-distance marriages and the temporalities of the transnational family , 2018, Current sociology. La Sociologie contemporaine.

[24]  J. Bartkowski,et al.  The Digital Divide among Parents and Their Emerging Adult Children: Intergenerational Accounts of Technologically Assisted Family Communication , 2019, Social Sciences.

[25]  Jaime Hsu.  Negotiating gendered media: learning ICTs in transnational Taiwanese families , 2018 .

[26]  Azadeh Forghani,et al.  Sharing Domestic Life through Long-Term Video Connections , 2015, TCHI.

[27]  Sahel Farshbaf Shaker.  A Study of Transnational Communication Among Iranian Migrant Women in Australia , 2018 .

[28]  Anita L. Vangelisti,et al.  An Individual Difference Explanation of Why Married Couples Engage in the Demand/Withdraw Pattern of Conflict , 2000 .

[29]  E. Cabalquinto.  ‘They could picture me, or I could picture them’: ‘Displaying’ family life beyond borders through mobile photography , 2020, Information, Communication & Society.

[30]  Jessica Vitak.  The Impact of Context Collapse and Privacy on Social Network Site Disclosures , 2012 .

[31]  Rachel H. Brown.  Multiple modes of care: internet and migrant caregiver networks in Israel , 2016 .

[32]  L. Hjorth,et al.  Digital Genealogies: Understanding Social Mobile Media LINE in the Role of Japanese Families , 2017 .

[33]  L. Bennett,et al.  Family rituals. , 1984, Family process.

[34]  Carmen Gonzalez,et al.  Transnational Family Communication as a Driver of Technology Adoption , 2016 .

[35]  D. Moher,et al.  Reprint--preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2009, Physical therapy.

[36]  M. Jackson,et al.  Strengthening Australian Families: Socioeconomic Status, Social Connectedness, and Family Functioning , 2014 .

[37]  David H. J. Morgan,et al.  Rethinking Family Practices , 2011 .

[38]  André Jansson.  Polymedia Distinctions , 2015 .

[39]  Christian Licoppe,et al.  ‘Connected’ Presence: The Emergence of a New Repertoire for Managing Social Relationships in a Changing Communication Technoscape , 2004 .

[40]  Rebecca Chiyoko King-O’Riain.  Emotional streaming and transconnectivity: Skype and emotion practices in transnational families in Ireland , 2015 .

[41]  Michael Chan,et al.  Mobile-mediated multimodal communications, relationship quality and subjective well-being: An analysis of smartphone use from a life course perspective , 2018, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[42]  Laura Stafford,et al.  Relational maintenance strategies and equity in marriage , 1992 .

[43]  Neal R Haddaway,et al.  The Role of Google Scholar in Evidence Reviews and Its Applicability to Grey Literature Searching , 2015, PloS one.

[44]  C. Crespo,et al.  Family rituals in New Zealand families: links to family cohesion and adolescents' well-being. , 2011, Journal of family psychology : JFP : journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association.

[45]  Xinyu Zhao.  Disconnective intimacies through social media: practices of transnational family among overseas Chinese students in Australia , 2019, Media International Australia.

[46]  C. Tufanaru,et al.  Methodological guidance for systematic reviews of observational epidemiological studies reporting prevalence and cumulative incidence data , 2015, International journal of evidence-based healthcare.

[47]  Daniel Miller,et al.  Mobile phone parenting: Reconfiguring relationships between Filipina migrant mothers and their left-behind children , 2011, New Media Soc..

[48]  Jennifer K. Rea,et al.  The Role of Online Communication in the Lives of Military Spouses , 2015 .

[49]  Todd L. Sandel,et al.  “Oh, I’m Here!”: Social Media’s Impact on the Cross-cultural Adaptation of Students Studying Abroad , 2014 .

[50]  Anita Whiting,et al.  Why people use social media: a uses and gratifications approach , 2013 .

[51]  Zachary Munn,et al.  Establishing confidence in the output of qualitative research synthesis: the ConQual approach , 2014, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[52]  Praveen Thokala,et al.  Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement checklist , 2012 .

[53]  Arul Chib,et al.  Migrant mothering and mobile phones: Negotiations of transnational identity , 2014 .

[54]  V. Francisco,et al.  ‘The Internet Is Magic’: Technology, Intimacy and Transnational Families , 2015 .

[55]  Kyong Yoon.  The media practice of ‘KaTalk’ in the face of Facebook: young Koreans’ use of mobile app platforms in a transnational context , 2016 .

[56]  Laura M. Padilla‐Walker,et al.  Getting a High-Speed Family Connection: Associations between Family Media Use and Family Connection. , 2012 .

[57]  Joana Carvalho,et al.  Family functioning and information and communication technologies: How do they relate? A literature review , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[58]  R. J. Repique.  Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants , 2013, Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association.

[59]  Jodi Dworkin,et al.  Parents' of adolescents use of social networking sites , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[60]  A. Ladkin,et al.  The ‘digital glimpse’ as imagining home , 2018 .

[61]  Sun Sun Lim,et al.  ‘If you are a foreigner in a foreign country, you stick together’: Technologically mediated communication and acculturation of migrant students , 2016, New Media Soc..

[62]  Zachary Munn,et al.  Qualitative research synthesis: methodological guidance for systematic reviewers utilizing meta-aggregation , 2015, International journal of evidence-based healthcare.

[63]  M. Nedelcu,et al.  ‘Doing family’ through ICT-mediated ordinary co-presence: transnational communication practices of Romanian migrants in Switzerland , 2016 .

[64]  Mihaela Nedelcu,et al.  Transnational grandparenting in the digital age: mediated co-presence and childcare in the case of Romanian migrants in Switzerland and Canada , 2017, European journal of ageing.

[65]  Richard Ling,et al.  Taken for Grantedness: The Embedding of Mobile Communication into Society , 2012 .

[66]  E. Cabalquinto,et al.  “We’re not only here but we’re there in spirit”: Asymmetrical mobile intimacy and the transnational Filipino family , 2018 .

[67]  L. Ryan,et al.  'The distance between us': A comparative examination of the technical, spatial and temporal dimensions of the transnational social relationships of highly skilled migrants , 2015 .

[68]  S. Petronio.  Boundaries of Privacy: Dialectics of Disclosure , 2002 .

[69]  Cecilia Gordano Peile,et al.  Immigrants and mobile phone uses: Spanish-speaking young adults recently arrived in London , 2016 .

[70]  Zeynep Tufekci.  Can You See Me Now? Audience and Disclosure Regulation in Online Social Network Sites , 2008 .

[71]  Communication in intact families , 2012 .

[72]  K. Hertlein.  Digital Dwelling: Technology in Couple and Family Relationships , 2012 .

[73]  C. Godfrey,et al.  Mixed methods systematic reviews , 2017 .

[74]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2010, International journal of surgery.

[75]  Andrew Schrock,et al.  Communicative Affordances of Mobile Media: Portability, Availability, Locatability, and Multimediality , 2015 .

[76]  Zachary Munn,et al.  The development of software to support multiple systematic review types: the Joanna Briggs Institute System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information (JBI SUMARI) , 2019, International journal of evidence-based healthcare.

[77]  Michael J. Merten,et al.  Adolescents’ Perceptions of Family Connectedness, Intrinsic Religiosity, and Depressed Mood , 2011 .

[78]  Danah Boyd,et al.  Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[79]  Loredana Ivan,et al.  Grannies on the Net: Grandmothers’ Experiences of Facebook in Family Communication , 2016 .

[80]  Daisuke Okabe,et al.  Technosocial Situations: Emergent Structuring of Mobile E-mail Use , 2003 .

[81]  Tingyu Kang,et al.  Gendered media, changing intimacy: internet-mediated transnational communication in the family sphere , 2012 .

[82]  Chia-chen Yang.  Social Media as More Than a Peer Space: College Freshmen Encountering Parents on Facebook , 2018 .

[83]  R. Wilding.  'Virtual' intimacies? Families communicating across transnational contexts , 2006 .

[84]  R. Harper,et al.  The Skype paradox: Homelessness and selective intimacy in the use of communications technology , 2019, Benjamins Current Topics.

[85]  Elisabeth McClure,et al.  "Facetime doesn't count": Video chat as an exception to media restrictions for infants and toddlers , 2015, Int. J. Child Comput. Interact..

[86]  Evangelos Karapanos,et al.  Need fulfillment and experiences on social media: A case on Facebook and WhatsApp , 2016, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[87]  Andy J. Merolla.  Relational Maintenance and Noncopresence Reconsidered: Conceptualizing Geographic Separation in Close Relationships* , 2010 .

[88]  B. Wellman,et al.  Weaving family connections on-and offline: the turn to networked individualism , 2018, Connecting Families?.

[89]  Kyungju Ahn.  Ambivalent gender power in interstitial space: The case of transnational South Korean mothers , 2017 .

[90]  C. Kelly.  ‘Let’s do some jumping together’: Intergenerational participation in the use of remote technology to co-construct social relations over distance , 2015 .

[91]  Zbigniew Smoreda,et al.  Are social networks technologically embedded?: How networks are changing today with changes in communication technology , 2005, Soc. Networks.

[92]  M. Prensky.  Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1 , 2001 .