The younger generation’s widespread use of online social network sites has raised concerns and debates about social network sites’ influence on this generation’s civic engagement, whether these sites undermine or promote prosocial behaviors. This study empirically examines how millennials’ social network site usage relates to volunteering, using the 2013 data of the Minnesota Adolescent Community Cohort Study. The findings reveal a positive association between a moderate level of Facebook use and volunteering, although heavy users are not more likely to volunteer than nonusers. This bell-shaped relationship between Facebook use and volunteering contrasts with the direct correlation between participation in off-line associational activities and volunteering. Overall, the findings suggest that it is natural to get mixed messages about social network sites’ impacts on civic engagement, and these platforms can be useful tools for getting the word out and recruiting episodic volunteers.
AndreassenC. S.PallesenS. (2014). Social network site addiction-an overview. Current Pharmaceutical Design, 20, 4053-4061.
2.
AndreassenC. S.PallesenS.GriffithsM. D. (2017). The relationship between addictive use of social media, narcissism, and self-esteem: Findings from a large national survey. Addictive Behaviors, 64, 287-293.
3.
AndreassenC. S.TorsheimT.BrunborgG. S.PallesenS. (2012). Development of a Facebook addiction scale. Psychological Reports, 110, 501-517.
4.
BeaudoinC. E.ThorsonE. (2004). Social capital in rural and urban communities: Testing differences in media effects and models. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81, 378-399.
5.
BennettW. L. (2012). The personalization of politics: Political identity, social media, and changing patterns of participation. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 644, 20-39.
6.
BoltonR. N.ParasuramanA.HoefnagelsA.MigchelsN.KabadayiS.GruberT.. . . SolnetD. (2013). Understanding generation Y and their use of social media: A review and research agenda. Journal of Service Management, 24, 245-267.
7.
BoulianneS. (2009). Does Internet use affect engagement? A meta-analysis of research. Political Communication, 26, 193-211.
8.
BrownE.FerrisJ. M. (2007). Social capital and philanthropy: An analysis of the impact of social capital on individual giving and volunteering. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36, 85-99.
9.
CnaanR. A.HeistH. D.StortiM. H. (2017). Episodic volunteering at a religious megaevent: Pope Francis’s visit to Philadelphia. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 28, 85-104.
10.
DeAndreaD. C.EllisonN. B.LaRoseR.SteinfieldC.FioreA. (2012). Serious social media: On the use of social media for improving students’ adjustment to college. The Internet and Higher Education, 15, 15-23.
11.
de VriesD. A.PeterJ.de GraafH.NikkenP. (2016). Adolescents’ social network site use, peer appearance-related feedback, and body dissatisfaction: Testing a mediation model. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45, 211-224.
EllisonN. B.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.
14.
EllisonN. B.SteinfieldC.LampeC. (2011). Connection strategies: Social capital implications of Facebook-enabled communication practices. New Media & Society, 13, 893-892.
15.
EllisonN. B.VitakJ.GrayR.LampeC. (2014). Cultivating social resources on social network sites: Facebook relationship maintenance behaviors and their role in social capital processes. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19, 855-870.
16.
ForsterJ. (2016). Minnesota Adolescent Community Cohort (MACC) Study 2000-2013. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor].
17.
ForsterJ.ChenV.PerryC.OswaldJ.WillmorthM. (2011). The Minnesota Adolescent Community Cohort Study: Design and baseline results. Prevention Science, 12, 201-210.
18.
GreenhowC.RobeliaB. (2009). Old communication, new literacies: Social network sites as social learning resources. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 1130-1161.
19.
GuoC.SaxtonG. D. (2014). Tweeting social change: How social media are changing nonprofit advocacy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43, 57-79.
20.
HamptonK.GouletL. S.RainieL.PurcellK. (2011). Social networking sites and our lives. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
21.
HargittaiE. (2007). Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 276-297.
22.
HuangC. (2018). Social network site use and academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 119, 76-83.
23.
HuangG. C.UngerJ. B.SotoD.FujimotoK.PentzM. A.Jordan-MarshM.ValenteT. W. (2014). Peer influences: The impact of online and offline friendship networks on adolescent smoking and alcohol use. Journal of Adolescent Health, 54, 508-514.
24.
IhmJ. (2017). Classifying and relating different types of online and offline volunteering. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28, 400-419.
25.
JenningsM. K.ZeitnerV. (2003). Internet use and civic engagement: A longitudinal analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67, 311-334.
26.
KarpinskiA. C.KirschnerP. A.OzerI.MellottJ. A.OchwoP. (2013). An exploration of social networking site use, multitasking, and academic performance among United States and European university students. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1182-1192.
27.
KavanaughA.CarrollJ. M.RossonM. B.ZinT. T.ReeseD. D. (2005). Community networks: Where offline communities meet online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4), Article 3.
28.
KristoffersonK.WhiteK.PelozaJ. (2014). The nature of slacktivism: How the social observability of an initial act of token support affects subsequent prosocial action. Journal of Consumer Research, 40, 1149-1166.
29.
LeeY.BrudneyJ. L. (2012). Participation in formal and informal volunteering: Implications for volunteer recruitment. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 23, 159-180.
30.
LoaderB. D.VromenA.XenosM. A. (2014). The networked young citizen: Social media, political participation and civic engagement. Information, Communication & Society, 17, 143-150.
31.
LongJ. S.FreeseJ. (2006). Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata. College Station, TX: Stata Press.
32.
LovejoyK.SaxtonG. D. (2012). Information, community, and action: How nonprofit organizations use social media. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17, 337-352.
33.
MeschD. J.RooneyP. M.SteinbergK. S.DentonB. (2006). The effects of race, gender, and marital status on giving and volunteering in Indiana. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35, 565-587.
34.
MooreM. (2012). Interactive media usage among millennial consumers. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 29, 436-444.
35.
NieN. H. (2001). Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the Internet: Reconciling conflicting findings. American Behavioral Scientist, 45, 420-435.
36.
O’KeeffeG. S.Clarke-PearsonK. (2011). The impact of social media on children, adolescents, and families. Pediatrics, 127, 800-804.
37.
PasekJ.MoreE.RomerD. (2009). Realizing the social Internet? Online social networking meets offline civic engagement. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 6, 197-215.
38.
PaulinM. J.FergusonR.JostN.FalluJ. M. (2014). Motivating millennials to engage in charitable causes through social media. Journal of Service Management, 25, 334-353.
PostmesT.BrunstingS. (2002). Collective action in the age of the Internet mass communication and online mobilization. Social Science Computer Review, 20(3), 290-301.
41.
PrimackB. A.ShensaA.SidaniJ. E.WhaiteE. O.LinL. Y.RosenD.. . . MillerE. (2017). Social media use and perceived social isolation among young adults in the U.S. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 53, 1-8.
42.
PutnamR. D. (2001). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
43.
ReuterC.HegerO.PipekV. (2013, May). Combining real and virtual volunteers through social media. Proceedings of the 10th International Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management conference, Baden-Baden, Germany.
44.
SchuermannD. (2016). Millennial college students and volunteering: Their motivations and perceived obstacles (Doctoral dissertation). University of Missouri, Columbia.
45.
SchumannS.KleinO. (2015). Substitute or stepping stone? Assessing the impact of low-threshold online collective actions on offline participation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 308-322.
46.
ShahD. V.KwakN.HolbertR. (2010). “Connecting” and “disconnecting” with civic life: Patterns of Internet use and the production of social capital. Political Communication, 18, 141-162.
47.
ShahD. V.SchmierbachM.HawkinsJ.EspinoR.DonavanJ. (2002). Nonrecursive models of Internet use and community engagement: Questioning whether time spent online erodes social capital. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 79, 964-987.
48.
ShawF.BurgessJ.CrawfordK.BrunsA. (2013). Sharing news, making sense, saying thanks: Patterns of talk on Twitter during the Queensland floods. Australian Journal of Communication, 40, 23-40.
SmithC.ChristoffersenK.DavidsonH.HerzogP. S. (2011). Lost in transition: The dark side of emerging adulthood. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
51.
SmithD. H. (1994). Determinants of voluntary association participation and volunteering: A literature review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 23, 243-263.
TongS.WaltherJ. B. (2011). Relational maintenance and CMC. In WrightK. V.WebbL. M. (Eds.), Computer-mediated communication in personal relationships (pp. 98-118). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing Inc.
56.
TwengeJ. M. (2013). The evidence for generation me and against generation we. Emerging Adulthood, 1, 11-16.
57.
TwengeJ. M.KonrathS.FosterJ. D.Keith CampbellW.BushmanB. J. (2008). Egos inflating over time: A cross-temporal meta-analysis of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality, 76, 875-902.
58.
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.
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.
60.
YerburyH. (2010). Who to be? Generation X and Y in civil society online. Youth Studies Australia, 29, 35-32.
61.
ZhangT.OmranB. A.CobanogluC. (2017). Generation Y’s positive and negative eWOM: Use of social media and mobile technology. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29, 732-761.
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.
