Web Survey Bibliography
Users of social network sites (SNS) often disclose a great amount of personal and intimate information on their profiles whilst at the same time stating to be concerned with their privacy. This phenomenon has been called privacy paradox and received attention from researchers as well as the media; SNS have reacted and offer now more fine-grained privacy settings. Thus, it is time to revisit the privacy paradox and examine which factors predict choices for certain privacy settings. SNS users have to find a balance between two conflicting motives - privacy protection and self-presentation. After all, the main purpose of SNS is to maintain strong and weak ties, which involves creating a profile and keeping people updated about one's life.
The first study focused on these conflicting motives, but looked also at the role of dispositional trust and narcissism. An online survey was held among 144 users of Hyves, the largest Dutch social network site. The results showed that active SNS users meanwhile protect their profiles. Almost 75% had changed the default privacy settings, mostly into more restrictive privacy settings. Although dispositional trust and narcissism were related to privacy concerns and use of the Internet for strategic self-presentation, the two Internet-specific attitudes were the best predictors of actual privacy settings.
Study 2 examined also the role of social norms. Users might also choose more protective privacy settings because many other users do so. University students (n = 70) were used as subjects in order to reach also less active Hyvers. Again, the majority had changed their privacy settings, indicating that the privacy paradox becomes smaller. Perceived norm turned out to be a strong predictor of privacy settings.
Thus, across two studies it was found that SNS users are not only concerned about their privacy, but that these privacy concerns translate into action. This challenges earlier studies reporting a privacy paradox. Internet-specific attitudes were better predictors than general personality characteristics. Moreover, social norms played an important role, stressing the importance of social influence processes in SNS. Practical implications will be discussed.
Conference homepage (abstract)
Web Survey Bibliography - Social networks (118)
- Sampling, Channels, and Contact Strategies in Internet Survey; 2013; Macrì, E., Tessitore, C.
- Internet-Based Recruitment to a Depression Prevention Intervention: Lessons From the Mood Memos Study...; 2013; Morgan, A. J., Jorm, A. F., Mackinnon, A. J.
- Sampling online communities: using triplets as basis for a (semi-) automated hyperlink web crawler.; 2013; Veny, Y.
- Use of a Social Networking Web Site for Recruiting Canadian Youth for Medical Research; 2013; Chu, J. L., Snider, C. E.
- 'Ready to complete the survey on Facebook': Web 2.0 as a research tool in business studies; 2013; Gregori, A., Baltar, F.
- Surveying “difficult-to-sample” backpackers through Facebook? Employing a mixed-mode dual...; 2013; Morris Paris, C.
- The integration of facebook into class management: an exploratory study; 2012; Chou, P. N.
- Metering mobile usage. Insights from global Arbitron mobile trends panel; 2012; Verkasalo, H.
- Social media as a data collection tool: the impact of Facebook in behavioural research; 2012; Zoppos, E.
- Snowball Sampling in Online Social Networks; 2012; Raissi, M., Ackland, R.
- The Use of Facebook as a Locating and Contacting Tool; 2012; McCarthy, T.
- Efficacy of a health-related Facebook social network site on health-seeking behaviors; 2012; Woolley, P., Peterson, M.
- Use of Web 2.0 to Recruit Australian Gay Men to an Online HIV/AIDS Survey; 2012; Theriault, N., Bi, P., Hiller, J. E., Nor, M.
- The use of new technologies on the British Birth Cohort Studies; 2012; Calderwood, L.
- Reliable Online Social Network Data Collection; 2012; Abdesslem, F. B., Parris, I., Henderson, T.
- Statisticians don’t like non-probability; 2012; Murphy, J.
- Comments on Using Facebook as a Sampling Frame for Surveys; 2012; Peytchev, A.
- Diasporas on the web: new networks, new methodologies; 2012; Crush, J., Eberhardt, C., Caesar, M., Chikanda, A., Pendleton, W., Hill, A.
- Not by the Book: Facebook as a Sampling Frame; 2012; Brickman Bhutta, C.
- Research design for studying online communities with web surveys; 2012; Petrovcic, A., Petric, G., Lozar Manfreda, K.
- Comfortable in the new medium: How online qual can benefit from our share-happy culture ; 2012; Rubenstein, P.
- The Effectiveness of Survey Recruitment Methods in Second Life; 2012; Dean, E., Cook, S., Murphy, J., Keating, M.
- Update Your Status Lately? – Then Why Not Respond to Our Survey!; 2012; Borie-Holtz, D.
- The Effect of Mode on Participant Responses to Qualitative Research in Virtual Worlds; 2012; Dipko, S., Billington, C., Brick, P. D.
- Opening Up Online: Social Networking and Online Survey Response Behaviors; 2012; Turner, S., Lackey, M., Irwin, N.
- Viability of Using Facebook to Increase Response Rates in an ABS Survey; 2012; Ruggiere, P., Sams, A., Niermann, A., Romero, E.
- Can Social Media Research replace traditional research methods?; 2012; Faber, T., Einhorn, M., Hofmann, O., Loeffler, M.
- Building online communities; 2011; Mlačić, B., Milas, G., Mikloušić, I.
- 2nd WEBDATANET Meeting Amsterdam. Global Data Collecting; 2011; van Beveren, I.
- Panel Recruitment via Facebook; 2011; Toepoel, V.
- New data sources for statistics: Experiences at Statistics Netherlands; 2011; Daas, P., ten Bosch, O., de Blois, C., Hoekstra, R., Roos, M.
- The Battle For Business Data: New Technologies Critical To Researchers' Arsenal; 2011; Anderson, J.
- Optimum Blending of Panels and Social Network Respondents; 2011; Gittelman, S. H., Portner, A.
- Seeking the right blend: Part II: What happens when you mix panel respondents and social network respondents...; 2011; Gittelman, S. H., Portner, A.
- Seeking the right blend: Part I: What happens when you mix panel respondents and social network respondents...; 2011; Gittelman, S. H., Portner, A.
- Web Survey Process within the Concept of eSocial Sciences; 2011; Vehovar, V.
- LinkedIn and Facebook in Belgium: The Influences and Biases of Social Network Sites in Recruitment and...; 2011; Caers, R., Castelyns, V.
- Researching Personal Information on the Public Web - Methods and Ethics; 2011; Wilkinson, D., Thelwall, M.
- A course is a course is a course: Factor invariance in student evaluation of online, blended and face...; 2011; Dziuban, C. D., Moskal, P.
- Twitter mood predicts the stock market.; 2011; Bollen, J., Mao, H., Zeng, X.-J.
- Using Facebook to Locate Sample Members; 2011; Rhodes, B. B., Marks, E. L.
- The power of qualitative research in the era of social media; 2011; Branthwaite, A., Patterson, S.
- Internet & Learning: A Decade of Transformation in Learning Practices; 2011; Haythornthwaite, C., Andrews, R., Jones, C., de Castell, S., Goodfellow, R., Jewitt, C., Barton, D.
- Social Science Research Methods in Internet Time; 2011; Karpf, D. A.
- Current state of social media use for survey research; 2011; Hill, C. A., Dean, E.
- Examining Response Rates and Patterns in a Multimode Experiment: A Study of Department Chairs/Heads...; 2011; Foster, K. N., Gaughan, M.
- Response Quantity, Response Quality, and Costs of Building an Online Panel via Social Contacts.; 2011; Toepoel, V.
- Mobile Experience Sampling: Reaching the Parts of Facebook Other Methods Cannot Reach; 2010; Abdesslem, F. B., Parris, I., Henderson, T.
- Walking in Facebook: A Case Study of Unbiased Sampling of OSNs; 2010; Gjoka, M., Kurant, M., Butts, C. T., Markopoulou, A.
- Social Networking Sites: Evaluating and Investigating their use in Academic Research; 2010; Redmond, F.