This study modelled the online environmental factors that drive news sharing behaviour, using social capital theory (SCT). An online survey was used to obtain data from 385 WhatsApp users in Nigeria, analysed with structural equation modelling-partial least squares (PLS). The study’s results suggest that social interaction ties, sense of belonging, reciprocity, homophily and trust positively predict news sharing behaviour. Specifically, social interaction ties was the strongest predictor of news sharing behaviour followed by sense of belonging and reciprocity. This study also found a positive association between age and news sharing and a non-significant association with gender. Hence, news sharing should also be viewed as a form of social cohesion from the relational communication perspective. This study has some interesting implications for theoretical advancement. Firstly, it extends the motivations for news sharing beyond the predominant personal motivations highlighted in the literature. Secondly, it contributes to social capital theory by incorporating homophily to form the cognitive aspect of social capital. Thirdly, it extends the application of SCT to comprehend news sharing behaviour on social media platforms (SMPs). Finally, it explores news sharing behaviour beyond the predominant Asian, European and US contexts.
AkhavanPMahdi HosseiniS (2016) Social capital, knowledge sharing, and innovation capability: An empirical study of R&D teams in Iran. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management28(1): 96–113.
2.
Al-EmranMShaalanKHassanienAE (2020) Effects of Facebook personal news sharing on building social capital in jordanian universities. In:Al-EmranMShaalanKHassanienAE (eds) Recent Advances in Intelligent Systems and Smart Applications. Cham: Springer, pp. 653–670.
3.
AndersonJCGerbingDW (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin103(3): 411–423.
4.
ApukeODOmarB (2020a) Fake news and COVID-19: Modelling the predictors of fake news sharing among social media users. Telematics and Informatics. Epub ahead of print 30July2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.tele.2020.101475
5.
ApukeODOmarB (2020b) Fake news proliferation in Nigeria: Consequences, motivations, and prevention through awareness. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews8(2): 318–327.
6.
ApukeODTuncaEA (2019) A comparative content analysis of television and blog coverage of internally displaced persons in Nigeria. Social Science Journal56(2): 168–182.
7.
BaltarFBrunetI (2012) Social research 2.0: Virtual snowball sampling method using Facebook. Internet Research22(1): 57–74.
8.
BergerJMilkmanKL (2011) What makes online content viral?Journal of Marketing Research49(2): 192–205.
9.
BoczkowskiPJMitchelsteinE (2013) The News Gap: When the Information Preferences of the Media and the Public Diverge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10.
BolinoMCTurnleyWHBloodgoodJM (2002) Citizenship behavior and the creation of social capital in organisations. The Academy of Management Review27(4): 505–522.
ChaiSKimM (2012) A socio-technical approach to knowledge contribution behavior: An empirical investigation of social networking sites users. International Journal of Information Management32(2): 118–126.
13.
ChangHHChuangSS (2011) Social capital and individual motivations on knowledge sharing: Participant involvement as a moderator. Information and Management48(1): 9–18.
14.
ChenXMaJWeiJYangS (2020) The role of perceived integration in WeChat usages for seeking information and sharing comments: A social capital perspective. Information and Management. Epub ahead of print 7February2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.im.2020.103280
15.
ChiuCMHsuMHWangETG (2006) Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision Support Systems42(3): 1872–1888.
16.
ChoiJ (2016) Why do people use news differently on SNSs? An investigation of the role of motivations, media repertoires, and technology cluster on citizens’ news-related activities. Computers in Human Behavior54: 249–256.
17.
ChungNNamKKooC (2016) Examining information sharing in social networking communities: Applying theories of social capital and attachment. Telematics and Informatics33(1): 77–91.
18.
CohenJ (1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
19.
ColemanJS (1988) Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology94(1988): S95–S120.
20.
DuffyATandocELingR (2019) Too good to be true, too good not to share: The social utility of fake news. Information Communication and Society. Epub ahead of print 5June2019. DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2019.1623904
21.
DusekGAYurovaYVRuppelCP (2015) Using social media and targeted snowball sampling to survey a hard-to-reach population: A case study. International Journal of Doctoral Studies10: 279–299.
22.
FangYHChiuCM (2010) In justice we trust: Exploring knowledge-sharing continuance intentions in virtual communities of practice. Computers in Human Behavior26(2): 235–246.
23.
FoxJMorelandJJ (2015) The dark side of social networking sites: An exploration of the relational and psychological stressors associated with Facebook use and affordances. Computers in Human Behavior45: 168–176.
24.
FukuyamaF (2001) Social capital, civil society and development. Third World Quarterly22(1): 7–20.
25.
GohDHLAngRPChuaAYKLeeCS (2009) Why we share: A study of motivations for mobile media sharing. In:LiuJWuJYaoYNishidaT (eds) Active Media Technology. AMT 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 5820. Berlin: Springer, pp. 195–206.
26.
GohDLingRHuangLLiewD (2019) News sharing as reciprocal exchanges in social cohesion maintenance. Information Communication and Society22(8): 1128–1144.
GuessANaglerJTuckerJ (2019) Less than you think: Prevalence and predictors of fake news dissemination on Facebook. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences32(2): 1–9.
29.
HairJFJrMatthewsLMMatthewsRLSarstedtM (2017) PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: Updated guidelines on which method to use. International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis1(2): 107–123.
30.
HairJFJrRisherJJSarstedtMRingleCM (2019) When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review31(1): 2–24.
31.
HansonGHaridakisP (2008) YouTube users watching and sharing the news: A uses and gratifications approach. The Journal of Electronic Publishing11(3): 1–15.
32.
HenselerJRingleCMSarstedtM (2014) A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science43(1): 115–135.
33.
HungSYDurcikovaALaiHMLinWM (2011) The influence of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on individuals knowledge sharing behavior. International Journal of Human Computer Studies69(6): 415–427.
34.
IhmJKimEM (2018) The hidden side of news diffusion: Understanding online news sharing as an interpersonal behavior. New Media and Society20(11): 4346–4365.
35.
IslamAKMNLaatoSTalukderSSutinenE (2020) Misinformation sharing and social media fatigue during COVID-19: An affordance and cognitive load perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change159(July): 120201.
36.
KarnowskiVLeonhardLKümpelAS (2018) Why users share the news: A theory of reasoned action-based study on the antecedents of news-sharing behavior. Communication Research Reports35(2): 91–100.
37.
KimHS (2015) Attracting views and going viral: How message features and news-sharing channels affect health news diffusion. Journal of Communication65(3): 512–534.
38.
KimJNamkoongKChenJ (2020) Predictors of online news-sharing intention in the U.S. and South Korea: An application of the theory of reasoned action. Communication Studies71(2): 315–331.
39.
KirchherrJCharlesK (2018) Enhancing the sample diversity of snowball samples: Recommendations from a research project on anti-dam movements in Southeast Asia. PLOS One13(8): e0201710.
40.
Knobloch-WesterwickSCarpentierFDBlumhoffANickelN (2005) Selective exposure effects for positive and negative news: Testing the robustness of the informational utility model. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly82(1): 181–195.
41.
KorantengFNWiafeI (2019) Factors that promote knowledge sharing on academic social networking sites: An empirical study. Education and Information Technologies24(2): 1211–1236.
42.
KorantengFNWiafeIKatsrikuFAApauR (2019) Understanding trust on social networking sites among tertiary students: An empirical study in Ghana. Applied Computing and Informatics. Epub ahead of print 30July2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.aci.2019.07.003
43.
KümpelASKarnowskiVKeylingT (2015) News sharing in social media: A review of current research on news sharing users, content, and networks. Social Media and Society1(2)
44.
KwonSJParkEKimKJ (2014) What drives successful social networking services? A comparative analysis of user acceptance of Facebook and Twitter. The Social Science Journal51(4): 534–544.
45.
LeeCSMaL (2012) News sharing in social media: The effect of gratifications and prior experience. Computers in Human Behavior28(2): 331–339.
46.
LeeCSMaLGohDHL (2011) Why do people share news in social media? In:ZhongNCallaghanVGhorbaniAAHuB (eds) Active Media Technology. AMT 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 6890. Berlin: Springer, pp. 129–140.
47.
LesterM (2013) Social capital and value creation: A replication of ‘The Role of Intrafirm Networks’ by Wenpin Tsai and Sumantra Ghoshal. American Journal of Business and Management2(2): 106–113.
48.
McPhersonMSmith-LovinLCookJM (2001) Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology27: 415–444.
49.
MaLLeeCSGohDH-L (2013a) Investigating influential factors influencing users to share news in social media. In: Proceedings of the 13th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries – JCDL ’13, pp. 403–404.
50.
MaLLeeCSGohDH (2013b) Understanding news sharing in social media from the diffusion of innovations perspective. In: Proceedings - 2013 IEEE International Conference on Green Computing and Communications and IEEE Internet of Things and IEEE Cyber, Physical and Social Computing, GreenCom-IThings-CPSCom 2013, pp. 1013–1020.
51.
MaLLeeCSGohDHL (2014) Understanding news sharing in social media: An explanation from the diffusion of innovations theory. Online Information Review38(5): 598–615.
52.
MaLSuntwalSBrownS, et al (2011) Intention to continue using facebook fan pages from the perspective of social capital theory. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking42(5): 1872–1888.
53.
MazurERichardsL (2011) Adolescents’ and emerging adults’ social networking online: Homophily or diversity?Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology32(4): 180–188.
54.
MuJPengGLoveE (2008) Interfirm networks, social capital, and knowledge flow. Journal of Knowledge Management12(4): 86–100.
55.
NahapietJGhoshalS (1998) Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. The Academy of Management Review23(2): 242–266.
56.
National Bureau of Statistics Nigeria (2018) Demographic Statistics Bulletin. Abuja.
57.
Oeldorf-HirschASundarSS (2015) Posting, commenting, and tagging: Effects of sharing news stories on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior44: 240–249.
58.
RamayahTCheahJChuahF, et al. (2018) Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using smartPLS 3.0. In: An Updated Guide and Practical Guide to Statistical Analysis. Harlow: Pearson.
59.
RampersadGAlthiyabiT (2020) Fake news: Acceptance by demographics and culture on social media. Journal of Information Technology and Politics17(1): 1–11.
60.
ShanSXinTWangL, et al. (2013) Identifying influential factors of knowledge sharing in emergency events: A virtual community perspective. Systems Research and Behavioral Science30(3): 367–382.
SteffesEMBurgeeLE (2009) Social ties and online word of mouth. Internet Research19(1): 42–59.
63.
SuMHLiuJMcLeodDM (2019) Pathways to news sharing: Issue frame perceptions and the likelihood of sharing. Computers in Human Behavior91: 201–210.
64.
SuiLKeX (2015) Intension analysis of user news sharing in social media. In:ZhangZShenZZhangJZhangR (eds) LISS 2014. Berlin: Springer, pp. 681–687.
65.
SunYPengZLimKHWangWM (2014) Norm of reciprocity, reciprocal benefits, and reciprocal relationships: A revisit of the role of reciprocity in knowledge sharing. In: 35th International Conference on Information Systems ‘Building a Better World Through Information System’, ICIS 2014, pp. 1–18.
66.
SwartJPetersCBroersmaM (2019) Sharing and discussing news in private social media groups: The social function of news and current affairs in location-based, work-oriented and leisure-focused communities. Digital Journalism7(2): 187–205.
67.
TalwarSDhirAKaurP, et al. (2019) Why do people share fake news? Associations between the dark side of social media use and fake news sharing behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services51(September): 72–82.
68.
ThompsonNWangXDayaP (2019) Determinants of news sharing behavior on social media. Journal of Computer Information Systems. Epub ahead of print 1February2019. DOI: 10.1080/08874417.2019.1566803
69.
WeeksBEHolbertRL (2013) Predicting dissemination of news content in social media: A focus on reception, friending, and partisanship. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly90(2): 212–232.
70.
WuWP (2008) Dimensions of social capital and firm competitiveness improvement: The mediating role of information sharing. Journal of Management Studies45(1): 122–146.
71.
YanJLeidnerDEBenbyaHZouW (2019) Social capital and knowledge contribution in online user communities: One-way or two-way relationship?Decision Support Systems127(August): 113131
72.
YuanYCGayG (2006) Homophily of network ties and bonding and bridging social capital in computer-mediated distributed teams. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication11(4): 1062–1084.
73.
ZhaoJZhC.PengZ, et al. (2018) User willingness toward knowledge sharing in social networks. Sustainability (Switzerland)10(12): 1–27.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
