This study explores the mechanisms by which online social information seeking (i.e., monitoring Facebook friends) relates to social capital. Based on the extant literature, we propose a theoretical framework that includes communication activities across different channels operationalized as offline participation, network structure on social network site operationalized as the number of actual online friends and network diversity, and self-esteem. Results from an online survey (N = 223) found a moderated mediation model in which participation in offline social activities mediated the relationship between social information seeking and self-reported bonding social capital, and self-esteem moderated this mediation. In addition, participation in offline social activities provided an additional channel to accessing bridging social capital. These results provide a theoretical framework for and suggest an approach of communication multiplexity to future research.
AikenL. S.WestS. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2.
AronA.NormanC. C.AronE. N.McKennaC. (2000). Couples’ shared participation in novel and arousing activities and experienced relationship quality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 273–284. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.78.2.273
3.
BarkerV. (2009). Older adolescents’ motivations for social network site use: The influence of gender, group identity, and collective self-esteem. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12, 209–213. doi:10.1089/cpb.2008.0228
4.
BaymN. K. (2009). A call for grounding in the face of blurred boundaries. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 720–723. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01461.x
5.
BaymN. K.LedbetterA. (2009). Tues that bind? Predicting friendship strength in a music-based social network. Information, Communication, & Society, 12, 408–427. doi:10.1080/13691180802635430
6.
BoaseJ. (2008). Personal networks and the personal communication system: Using multiple media to connect. Information, Communication, & Society, 11, 490–508.
7.
BurkeM.MarlowC.LentoT. (2010). Social network activity and social well-being. Paper presented at the CHI 2010, Atlanta, GA.
8.
BurkeM.KrautR.MarlowC. (2011). Social capital on Facebook: Differentiating uses and users. Paper presented at the CHI 2011, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
9.
BurtR. S. (1992). Structure holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10.
BourdieuP.WacquantL. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
11.
BouvardM.GuerinJ.RionA. C.BouchardC.DucottetE.SechaudM.CottrauxJ. (1999). Psychometric study of the social self-esteem inventory of Lawson et al. (1979). European Review of Applied Psychology, 49, 165–172.
12.
boydD. (2006). Friends, Friendsters, and MySpace Top 8: Writing community into being on social network sites. First Monday, 11.
13.
CampbellA. J.CummingS. R.HughesI. (2006). Internet use by the socially fearful: Addiction or therapy?CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9, 69–81. doi:10.1089/cpb.2006.9.69
14.
CanaryD. J.StaffordL.HauseK. S.WallaceL. A. (1993). An inductive analysis of relational maintenance strategies: Comparisons among lovers, relatives, friends, and others. Communication Research Reports, 10, 3–14. doi:10.1080/08824099309359913
15.
CohenJ.CohenP. C.WestS. G.AikenL. S. (2002). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
16.
ColemanJ. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, s95–s121. doi:10.1086/228943
17.
DesjarlaisM.WilloughbyT. (2010). A longitudinal study of the relation between adolescent boys and girls’ computer use with friends and friendship quality: Support for the social compensation or the rich-get-richer hypothesis?Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 896–905. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.02.004
18.
DindiaK.BaxterL. A. (1987). Strategies for maintaining and repairing marital relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 4, 143–158. doi:10.1177/0265407587042003
DunbarR. I. M. (1996). Grooming, gossip, and the evolution of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
21.
EllisonN.SteinfieldC.LampeC. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “Friends”: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 1143–1168. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x
22.
EllisonN.SteinfieldC.LampeC. (2011). Connection strategies: Social capital implications of Facebook-enabled communication practices. New Media & Society, 13, 1–20. doi:10.1177/1461444810385389
23.
ForestA. L.WoodJ. V. (2012). When social networking is not working: Individuals with low self-esteem recognize but do not reap the benefits of self-disclosure on Facebook. Psychological Science, 23, 295–302. doi:10.1177/0956797611429709
24.
GranovetterM. (1973). The strength of weak ties. The American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360–1380. doi:10.1086/225469
25.
GranovetterM. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. Sociological Theory, 1, 201–233. doi:10.2307/202051
HayesA. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
28.
HaythornthwaiteC. (2001). Exploring multiplexity: Social networks structure in a computer-supported distance learning class. The Information Society, 17, 211–226. doi:10.1080/01972240152493065
29.
HaythornthwaiteC. (2002). Strong, weak, and latent ties and the impact of new media. The Information Society, 18, 385–401. doi:10.1080/01972240290108195
30.
HaythornthwaiteC. (2005). Social networks and Internet connectivity effects. Information, Communication & Society, 8, 125–147. doi:10.1080/13691180500146185
31.
HaythronthwaiteC.WellmanB. (1998). Work, friendship, and media use for information exchange in a networked organization. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(12), 1101–1114. Doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1998)49:12%3C1101::AID-ASI6%3E3.3.CO;2-S
32.
IgarashiT.TakaiJ.YoshidaT. (2005). Gender differences in social network development via mobile phone text messages: A longitudinal study. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22, 691–713. doi:10.1177/0265407505056492
33.
KrautR.KieslerS.BonevaB.CummingsJ.HelgesonV.CrawfordA. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 49–74. doi:10.1111/1540-4560.00248
34.
KrautR.PattersonM. L.LundmarkV.KieslerS.MukopadhyayT.ScherlisW. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being?American Psychologist, 53, 1017–1031. doi:10.1037//0003-066X.53.9.1017
35.
KwanV. S. Y.BondM. H.SingelisT. M. (1997). Pancultural explanations for life satisfaction: Adding relationship harmony to self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1038–1051. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.73.5.1038
36.
La Due LakeR.HuckfeldtR. (1998). Social capital, social networks, and political participation. Political Psychology, 19, 567–584. doi:10.1111/0162-895X.00118
37.
LedbetterA. (2009). Patterns of media use and multiplexity: Associations with sex, geographic distance and friendship interdependence. New Media, & Society, 11, 1187–1208. doi:10.1177/1461444809342057
38.
LeeS. J. (2009). Online communication and adolescent social ties: Who benefits more from Internet use?Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 509–531. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01451.x
39.
LiX.FangX.StantonB.FeigelmanS.DongQ. (1996). The rate and pattern of alcohol consumption among Chinese adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 19, 353–361. doi:10.1016/S1054-139X(96)00159-0
40.
LinN. (1982). Social resources and instrumental action. In MarsdenP. V.LinN. (Eds.), Social structure and network analysis (pp. 131–145). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
41.
McCraeR. R.CostaP. T.Jr (1998). Age, personality, and the spontaneous self-concept. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 43, S177–S185. doi:10.1093/geronj/43.6.S177
42.
McKennaK. Y. A.GreenA. S.GleasonM. E. J. (2002). Relationship formation on the Internet: What’s the big attraction?Journal of Social Issues, 58, 9–31.
43.
MeschG.TalmudI. (2006). The quality of online and offline relationships: The role of multiplexity and duration of social relationships: The Information Society, 22(3), 137–148. Doi: 10.1080/01972240600677805
44.
PoleyM.LuoS. (2012). Social compensation or rich get richer? The role of social competence in college students’ use of the Internet to find a partner. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 414–419. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.10.012
45.
PreacherK. J.RuckerD. D.HayesA. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 185–227. doi:10.1080/00273170701341316
46.
PutnamR. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
47.
ResnickP. (2002). Beyond bowling together: Sociotechnical capital. In CarrollJ. (Ed.), Human-computer interaction in the new millennium (p. 24). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
48.
RosenbergM. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
49.
RuiJ.StefanoneM. A. (2013). Strategic self-presentation online: A cross-cultural study. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 110–118. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.022
50.
SteinfieldC.EllisonN.B.LampeC. (2008). Social capital, self-esteem, and use of online social network sites: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(6), 434–445. Doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2008.07.002
51.
StefanoneM. A.KwonK. H.LackaffD. (2012). The relationship between perceptions of online capital and enacted support. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17, 451–466. Doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01585.x
TianQ. (2011). Social anxiety, motivation, self-disclosure, and computer-mediated friendship: A path analysis of the social interaction in the blogsphere. Communication Research, 40, 237–260. doi:10.1177/0093650211420137
54.
ValenzuelaS.ParkN.KeeK. F. (2009). Is there social capital in a social network site? Facebook use and college students’ life satisfaction, trust, and participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 875–901. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01474.x
55.
ValkenburgP. M.PeterJ. (2007). Preadolescents’ and adolescents’ online communication and their closeness to friends. Developmental Psychology, 43, 267–277. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.2.267
56.
VergeerM.PelzerB. (2009). Consequences of media and Internet use for offline and online network capital and well-being: A causal model approach. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 15, 189–210. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01499.x
57.
WaltherJ. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3–43. doi:10.1177/009365096023001001.
58.
WaltherJ. B. (2011). Theories of computer-mediated communication and interpersonal relations. In KnappM. L.DalyJ. A. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of interpersonal communication (4th ed., pp. 443–479). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
59.
WellmanB.HaaseA. Q.WitteJ.HamptonK. (2001). Does the Internet increase, decrease, or supplement social capital: Social networks, participation, and community commitment. American Behavioral Scientist, 45, 436–455. doi:10.1177/00027640121957286
60.
WellmanB.WortleyS. (1990). Different strokes from different folks: Community ties and social support. American Journal of Sociology, 96, 558–588. doi:10.1086/229572
61.
WilliamsD. (2006). On and off the ’net: Scales for social capital in an online era. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 593–628. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00029.x
62.
ZywicaJ.DanowskiJ. (2008). The faces of Facebookers: Investigating social enhancement and social compensation hypotheses; predicting FacebookTM and offline popularity from sociability and self-esteem, and mapping the meanings of popularity with semantic networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 1–34. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2008.01429.x
