An exploration of motives and behavior across Facebook and Twitter

The purpose of this paper is to elaborate on how people navigate the social media ecosystem and how they decide, which social network site (SNS) to use. To this end, the current study draws from uses and gratifications (U&G) theory to elicit and compare motives for the use of Facebook and Twitter and uses behavioral data to examine the findings in the context of technology non-use.,An online survey was administered to 232 Facebook users and the results were complemented with 12 usage variables collected via the Facebook application programing interface for the same users. Exploratory factor analysis identified and described the motives for using Facebook and Twitter and multiple regression models examined the relationships between the motives for using the two sites. A multivariate analysis of variance and a series of t-tests investigated the differences in actual behavior between Twitter users and non-users.,Results suggest that SNS users will use both sites to gratify their need for information, but will only do so for entertainment that has social characteristics. Furthermore, Facebook users that are more embedded in the site and use the site to support their offline life are more likely to also use Twitter.,The paper includes implications for SNS researchers, designers and managers by highlighting the motivational and behavioral differences between users of the two sites and the importance of technological affordances for understanding and explaining SNS selection.,This study extends previous cross-site U&G and non-use research by combining survey and behavioral data.

[1]  Thomas J. Johnson,et al.  Reasons to believe: Influence of credibility on motivations for using social networks , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[2]  Prashant Palvia,et al.  Contextual constraints in media choice: Beyond information richness , 2011, Decis. Support Syst..

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

[4]  Jihoon Kim,et al.  Uses and gratifications of social networking sites for bridging and bonding social capital: A comparison of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat , 2017, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[5]  Fethi Calisir,et al.  An empirical study on factors affecting continuance intention of using Facebook , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[6]  KimJihoon,et al.  Uses and gratifications of social networking sites for bridging and bonding social capital , 2017 .

[7]  LinRuoyun,et al.  The emotional responses of browsing Facebook , 2015 .

[8]  Thomas F. Stafford,et al.  Determining Uses and Gratifications for the Internet , 2004, Decis. Sci..

[9]  Yamir Moreno,et al.  The Dynamics of Protest Recruitment through an Online Network , 2011, Scientific reports.

[10]  Kunihiko Higa,et al.  A Study on Communication Media Selection: Comparing the Effectiveness of the Media Richness, Social Influence, and Media Fitness , 2011 .

[11]  Devon D. Brewer,et al.  Forgetting in the recall-based elicitation of personal and social networks , 2000, Soc. Networks.

[12]  Reynol Junco,et al.  Comparing actual and self-reported measures of Facebook use , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[13]  J JohnsonThomas,et al.  Reasons to believe , 2015 .

[14]  E. Katz,et al.  On the use of the mass media for important things. , 1973 .

[15]  Monika Taddicken,et al.  The 'Privacy Paradox' in the Social Web: The Impact of Privacy Concerns, Individual Characteristics, and the Perceived Social Relevance on Different Forms of Self-Disclosure1 , 2014, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[16]  Teresa Correa,et al.  Ties, Likes, and Tweets: Using Strong and Weak Ties to Explain Differences in Protest Participation Across Facebook and Twitter Use , 2018, Studying Politics Across Media.

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

[18]  Alfred Kobsa,et al.  Dimensionality of information disclosure behavior , 2013, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[19]  Anol Bhattacherjee,et al.  Elucidating Individual Intention to Use Interactive Information Technologies: The Role of Network Externalities , 2008, Int. J. Electron. Commer..

[20]  Erin K. Ruppel,et al.  Channel Complementarity Theory and the Health Information-Seeking Process , 2016, Commun. Res..

[21]  HiltzStarr Roxanne,et al.  Do I Stay or Do I Go , 2019 .

[22]  Lin Qiu,et al.  Two Sites, Two Voices: Linguistic Differences between Facebook Status Updates and Tweets , 2013, HCI.

[23]  Anja Bechmann,et al.  Using APIs for Data Collection on Social Media , 2014, Inf. Soc..

[24]  M. Lynne Markus,et al.  Toward a “Critical Mass” Theory of Interactive Media , 1987 .

[25]  James R. Rae,et al.  Do motivations for using Facebook moderate the association between Facebook use and psychological well-being? , 2015, Front. Psychol..

[26]  Anabel Quan-Haase,et al.  Networks of digital humanities scholars: The informational and social uses and gratifications of Twitter , 2015, Big Data Soc..

[27]  A. Kaplan,et al.  Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media , 2010 .

[28]  Rowan Wilken.  Mobile media and ecologies of location , 2015 .

[29]  BuccafurriFrancesco,et al.  Comparing Twitter and Facebook user behavior , 2015 .

[30]  Constantinos K. Coursaris,et al.  Disentangling Twitter’s Adoption and Use (Dis)Continuance: A Theoretical and Empirical Amalgamation of Uses and Gratifications and Diffusion of Innovations , 2013 .

[31]  Anthony Paik,et al.  Social Isolation in America: An Artifact , 2013 .

[32]  Sonja Utz,et al.  Snapchat Elicits More Jealousy than Facebook: A Comparison of Snapchat and Facebook Use , 2015, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[33]  Deen Freelon.  Computational Research in the Post-API Age , 2018, Political Communication.

[34]  Madeline E. Smith,et al.  Limiting, leaving, and (re)lapsing: an exploration of facebook non-use practices and experiences , 2013, CHI.

[35]  Laura Frances Bright,et al.  Too much Facebook? An exploratory examination of social media fatigue , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[36]  Amandeep Dhir,et al.  Why do we tag photographs on Facebook? Proposing a new gratifications scale , 2017, New Media Soc..

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

[38]  B. Hogan.  The Presentation of Self in the Age of Social Media: Distinguishing Performances and Exhibitions Online , 2010 .

[39]  K. Quinn,et al.  Why We Share: A Uses and Gratifications Approach to Privacy Regulation in Social Media Use , 2016 .

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

[41]  Francesco Buccafurri,et al.  Comparing Twitter and Facebook user behavior: Privacy and other aspects , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[42]  Christopher H. Ruehl,et al.  Communication management on social networking sites , 2015 .

[43]  Athanasios Mazarakis,et al.  Editorial of the Special Issue on Following User Pathways: Key Contributions and Future Directions in Cross-Platform Social Media Research , 2018, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[44]  H. Kaiser.  An index of factorial simplicity , 1974 .

[45]  Anabel Quan-Haase,et al.  Uses and Gratifications of Social Media: A Comparison of Facebook and Instant Messaging , 2010 .

[46]  Pin Luarn,et al.  Key variables to predict tie strength on social network sites , 2015, Internet Res..

[47]  Michail N. Giannakos,et al.  Using Facebook out of habit , 2013, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[48]  Kan-Min Lin,et al.  Understanding undergraduates’ problems from determinants of Facebook continuance intention , 2016, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[49]  Airi Lampinen,et al.  Why we need to examine multiple social network sites , 2016 .

[50]  Amandeep Dhir,et al.  Uses and Gratifications of digital photo sharing on Facebook , 2016, Telematics Informatics.

[51]  Rui Chen,et al.  Why do users continue using social networking sites? An exploratory study of members in the United States and Taiwan , 2013, Inf. Manag..

[52]  Anthony M. Limperos,et al.  Uses and Grats 2.0: New Gratifications for New Media , 2013 .

[53]  Anabel Quan-Haase,et al.  The Uses and Gratifications (U&G) Approach as a Lens for Studying Social Media Practice , 2014 .

[54]  Sonja Utz,et al.  The emotional responses of browsing Facebook: Happiness, envy, and the role of tie strength , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[55]  Rebecca Ping Yu,et al.  The relationship between passive and active non-political social media use and political expression on Facebook and Twitter , 2016, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[56]  Mark S. Ackerman,et al.  The Intellectual Challenge of CSCW: The Gap Between Social Requirements and Technical Feasibility , 2000, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[57]  Rong-An Shang,et al.  The effects of information overload on consumers' subjective state towards buying decision in the internet shopping environment , 2009, Electron. Commer. Res. Appl..

[58]  Marco Gonzalez,et al.  Author's Personal Copy Social Networks Tastes, Ties, and Time: a New Social Network Dataset Using Facebook.com , 2022 .

[59]  A. Rangaswamy,et al.  Customer satisfaction and loyalty in online and offline environments , 2003 .

[60]  Thomas E. Ruggiero.  Uses and Gratifications Theory in the 21st Century , 2000 .

[61]  Kathleen Richardson,et al.  Archiving the self? Facebook as biography of social and relational memory , 2009, J. Inf. Commun. Ethics Soc..