Talking in circles: selective sharing in google+

Online social networks have become indispensable tools for information sharing, but existing 'all-or-nothing' models for sharing have made it difficult for users to target information to specific parts of their networks. In this paper, we study Google+, which enables users to selectively share content with specific 'Circles' of people. Through a combination of log analysis with surveys and interviews, we investigate how active users organize and select audiences for shared content. We find that these users frequently engaged in selective sharing, creating circles to manage content across particular life facets, ties of varying strength, and interest-based groups. Motivations to share spanned personal and informational reasons, and users frequently weighed ''limiting' factors (e.g. privacy, relevance, and social norms) against the desire to reach a large audience. Our work identifies implications for the design of selective sharing mechanisms in social networks.

[1]  Alessandro Acquisti,et al.  Imagined Communities: Awareness, Information Sharing, and Privacy on the Facebook , 2006, Privacy Enhancing Technologies.

[2]  Mor Naaman,et al.  Is it really about me?: message content in social awareness streams , 2010, CSCW '10.

[3]  Elizabeth F. Churchill,et al.  Faceted identity, faceted lives: social and technical issues with being yourself online , 2011, CSCW.

[4]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  Power-Law Distributions in Empirical Data , 2007, SIAM Rev..

[5]  Timothy W. Finin,et al.  Why we twitter: understanding microblogging usage and communities , 2007, WebKDD/SNA-KDD '07.

[6]  David A. Huffaker,et al.  Gender, Identity, and Language Use in Teenage Blogs , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[7]  Susan C. Herring,et al.  Beyond Microblogging: Conversation and Collaboration via Twitter , 2009, 2009 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

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

[9]  Shelly Farnham,et al.  Life "modes" in social media , 2011, CHI.

[10]  Yang Wang,et al.  "I regretted the minute I pressed share": a qualitative study of regrets on Facebook , 2011, SOUPS.

[11]  E. Goffman.  The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life , 1959 .

[12]  Jonathan Grudin,et al.  When social networks cross boundaries: a case study of workplace use of facebook and linkedin , 2009, GROUP.

[13]  Susan B. Barnes,et al.  A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States , 2006, First Monday.

[14]  Andrew Howes,et al.  The problem of conflicting social spheres: effects of network structure on experienced tension in social network sites , 2009, CHI.

[15]  Fernanda B. Viégas,et al.  Bloggers' Expectations of Privacy and Accountability: An Initial Survey , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[16]  Eamonn O'Neill,et al.  Feasibility of structural network clustering for group-based privacy control in social networks , 2010, SOUPS.

[17]  Paul Dourish,et al.  Unpacking "privacy" for a networked world , 2003, CHI '03.

[18]  Hsiu-Fang Hsieh,et al.  Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis , 2005, Qualitative health research.

[19]  Heather Richter Lipford,et al.  Strategies and struggles with privacy in an online social networking community , 2008, BCS HCI.

[20]  J. Freedman,et al.  Conceptions of Crowding. (Book Reviews: Crowding and Behavior; The Environment and Social Behavior. Privacy, Personal Space. Territory, Crowding) , 1975 .

[21]  Jeff A. Johnson,et al.  Integrating communication and information through ContactMap , 2002, CACM.

[22]  Alessandro Acquisti,et al.  Information revelation and privacy in online social networks , 2005, WPES '05.

[23]  E. Hall,et al.  The Hidden Dimension , 1970 .