👍 as social support: Relational closeness, automaticity, and interpreting social support from paralinguistic digital affordances in social media

Many social media facilitate paralinguistic digital affordances (PDAs): one-click tools for phatic communication to which senders and receivers alike ascribe meaning. This research explores the nature of social support perceived from the receipt of PDAs within social media, seeking to understand how individuals ascribe supportive meaning to PDAs based on (1) their goal in the post to which the PDA was used as a reply, (2) relational closeness with the PDA provider, and (3) the perceived automaticity of the PDA received. A national survey (N 1⁄4 325) explored the receipt of PDAs across five social media, and facilitated cross-platform analysis. Analyses reveal both main and interaction effects among the three proposed antecedents, so that intentional PDAs from relationally close providers to messages seeking social support were perceived as most supportive. Findings reveal individuals heuristically make idiosyncratic sense of the same cue from different senders in different situations. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

[1]  Stephen A. Rains,et al.  Weak-Tie Support Network Preference and Perceived Life Stress Among Participants in Health-Related, Computer-Mediated Support Groups , 2010, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[2]  Vincent Miller.  New Media, Networking and Phatic Culture , 2008 .

[3]  John Laver,et al.  Communication in face to face interaction: selected readings, 1st Edition , 1972, Penguin Modern Linguistics Readings.

[4]  三嶋 博之.  The theory of affordances , 2008 .

[5]  Cliff Lampe,et al.  The Benefits of Facebook "Friends: " Social Capital and College Students' Use of Online Social Network Sites , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[6]  K RuppelErin,et al.  Same stuff different day , 2015 .

[7]  B. Verplanken,et al.  Reflections on past behavior: A self-report index of habit strength , 2003 .

[8]  Gina Neff,et al.  Imagined Affordance: Reconstructing a Keyword for Communication Theory , 2015 .

[9]  Nicole C. Krämer,et al.  Let the Weakest Link Go! Empirical Explorations on the Relative Importance of Weak and Strong Ties on Social Networking Sites , 2014 .

[10]  Donghee Yvette Wohn,et al.  Designing Paralinguistic Digital Affordances for Social Support , 2016, CSCW Companion.

[11]  S. Cobb.  Presidential Address-1976. Social support as a moderator of life stress. , 1976, Psychosomatic medicine.

[12]  Stephen A. Rains,et al.  The Social Dimension of Blogging about Health: Health Blogging, Social Support, and Well-being , 2011 .

[13]  Susanne M. Jones,et al.  “Sad Monkey See, Monkey Do:” Nonverbal Matching in Emotional Support Encounters , 2007 .

[14]  Brandon Van Der Heide,et al.  On the Conditional Cueing of Credibility Heuristics , 2016, Commun. Res..

[15]  R. Putnam.  Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital , 1995, The City Reader.

[16]  J. Bargh,et al.  Automaticity of social behavior: direct effects of trait construct and stereotype-activation on action. , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[17]  James D. Robinson,et al.  Expanding the Walls of the Health Care Encounter: Support and Outcomes for Patients Online , 2011, Health communication.

[18]  Cliff Lampe,et al.  Connection strategies: Social capital implications of Facebook-enabled communication practices , 2011, New Media Soc..

[19]  Nicole B. Ellison,et al.  'There's a Network Out There You Might as Well Tap': Social Support and Information-Sharing on Facebook by Adult Users , 2010 .

[20]  Maija Reblin,et al.  Provider and recipient factors that may moderate the effectiveness of received support: examining the effects of relationship quality and expectations for support on behavioral and cardiovascular reactions , 2010, Journal of Behavioral Medicine.

[21]  Elizabeth A. Craig,et al.  Role strain and online social support for childless stepmothers , 2011 .

[22]  I. Altman,et al.  Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships , 1973 .

[23]  R. Nickerson.  Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises , 1998 .

[24]  B. Hogan.  Networking in Everyday Life , 2009 .

[25]  C. Carr,et al.  Social Media: Defining, Developing, and Divining , 2015 .

[26]  Alcides Velasquez,et al.  Habit as an explanation of participation in an online peer-production community , 2012, CHI.

[27]  Mark S. Granovetter.  T H E S T R E N G T H O F WEAK TIES: A NETWORK THEORY REVISITED , 1983 .

[28]  S. Weiss,et al.  Social Support Needs of Family Caregivers of Psychiatric Patients From Three Age Groups , 1991, Nursing research.

[29]  Koen De Temmerman,et al.  Crafting Characters: Heroes and Heroines in the Ancient Greek Novel , 2014 .

[30]  P. Leonardi,et al.  Social Media Use in Organizations: Exploring the Affordances of Visibility, Editability, Persistence, and Association , 2013 .

[31]  C. Steinfield,et al.  A Social Information Processing Model of Media Use in Organizations , 1987 .

[32]  Peter Andersen,et al.  Proxemic and haptic interaction: The closeness continuum. , 2013 .

[33]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[34]  D. Y. Wohn,et al.  One Click, Many Meanings: Interpreting Paralinguistic Digital Affordances in Social Media , 2016 .

[35]  Erin K. Ruppel,et al.  "Same stuff different day: " A mixed-method study of support seeking on Facebook , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

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

[37]  A. Aron,et al.  Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness , 1992 .

[38]  Maeve Duggan,et al.  Social Media Update 2016 , 2016 .

[39]  Claude H. Miller,et al.  A Measure of Weak-Tie/Strong-Tie Support Network Preference , 2010 .

[40]  Victoria Wang,et al.  On Phatic Technologies for Creating and Maintaining Human Relationships , 2011 .

[41]  A. Jensen,et al.  Association of perceived physician communication style with patient satisfaction, distress, cancer-related self-efficacy, and perceived control over the disease , 2003, British Journal of Cancer.

[42]  J. Walther.  Computer-Mediated Communication , 1996 .

[43]  William W. Gaver.  Technology affordances , 1991, CHI.

[44]  Nicole B. Ellison,et al.  ‘There’s a network out there you might as well tap’: Exploring the benefits of and barriers to exchanging informational and support-based resources on Facebook , 2013, New Media Soc..

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

[46]  Fred D. Davis.  Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[47]  D. Y. Wohn.  The Role of Habit Strength in Social Network Game Play , 2012 .

[48]  B. Gardner,et al.  Towards parsimony in habit measurement: Testing the convergent and predictive validity of an automaticity subscale of the Self-Report Habit Index , 2012, International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.

[49]  J. Miles,et al.  Applying regression & correlation : a guide for students and researchers , 2001 .

[50]  Cameron W. Piercy,et al.  Notification pending: Online social support from close and nonclose relational ties via Facebook , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[51]  Danah Boyd,et al.  I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience , 2011, New Media Soc..

[52]  L. Reinecke,et al.  Influence of Social Support Received in Online and Offline Contexts on Satisfaction With Social Support and Satisfaction With Life: A Longitudinal Study , 2015 .

[53]  Mark S. Granovetter.  The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[54]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Affordance, conventions, and design , 1999, INTR.

[55]  Kevin B. Wright,et al.  Health-related Support Groups on the Internet: Linking Empirical Findings to Social Support and Computer-mediated Communication Theory , 2003, Journal of health psychology.

[56]  B. Gardner,et al.  The Measurement of Habit , 2018 .

[57]  Cliff Lampe,et al.  Facebook as a toolkit: A uses and gratification approach to unbundling feature use , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[58]  W. Ford,et al.  Evaluation of the Indirect Influence of Courteous Service on Customer Discretionary Behavior. , 1995 .