Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2013-3
‘There’s a network out there you might as well tap’: Exploring the benefits of and barriers to exchanging informational and support-based resources on Facebook
Research has established a positive relationship between Facebook use and perceptions of social capital, a construct that describes the total resources − both potential and actual − available in one’s social network. However, the process through which social capital conversions occur is unclear. This study presents results from semi-structured interviews with 18 adult Facebook users (ages 25 to 55) about their Facebook use, focusing on how participants use the site to request and provide social support (associated with bonding social capital) and information (associated with bridging social capital). Findings describe how Facebook use facilitates interactions related to social capital and users’ beliefs about the potential negative outcomes of these interactions, providing insight into how users negotiate potential benefits and risks when making decisions about site use.
BergerPLLuckmanT (1980) The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Irvington Publishers.
2.
BourdieuP (1985) The forms of capital. In: RichardsonJG (ed.) Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New York: Greenwood, pp. 241–258.
3.
boydd (2008) Taken out of context: American teen sociality in networked publics. Doctoral thesis, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
4.
BurkeMKrautRMarlowC (2011) Social capital on Facebook: differentiating uses and users. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM, pp. 571–580.
5.
BurkeMMarlowCLentoT (2010) Social network activity and social well-being. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM, pp. 1909–1912.
6.
BurtRS (2000) The network structure of social capital. In: StawBMSuttonRI (eds) Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 22. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 345–423.
7.
DonathJS (2007) Signals in social supernets. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication13(1): 72–83.
8.
EllisonNBboydd (in press) Sociality through social network sites. In: DuttonWH (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Internet Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9.
EllisonNLampeCSteinfieldC. (2010) With a little help from my friends: social network sites and social capital. In: PapacharissiZ (ed.) The Networked Self: Identity, Community and Culture on Social Network Sites. New York: Routledge, pp. 124–145.
10.
EllisonNBSteinfieldCLampeC (2007) The benefits of Facebook ‘friends’: exploring the relationship between college students’ use of online social networks and social capital. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication12(4): 1143–1168.
11.
EllisonNBSteinfieldCLampeC (2011a) Connection strategies: social capital implications of Facebook-enabled communication practices. New Media & Society13(6): 873–892.
12.
EllisonNVitakJSteinfieldC. (2011b) Negotiating privacy concerns and social capital needs in a social media environment. In: TrepteSReineckeL (eds) Privacy Online: Perspectives on Privacy and Self-Disclosure in the Social Web. New York: Springer, pp. 19–32.
13.
GranovetterM (1973) The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology78(6): 1360–1380.
14.
GoffmanE (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor.
15.
HamptonKSessionsLEunJH. (2009) Social Isolation and New Technology: How the Internet and Mobile Phones Impact Americans’ Social Networks. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
16.
HamptonKGouletLSRainieL. (2011) Social Networking Sites and our Lives. Washington, DC: Pew Internet Project.
17.
HaythornthwaiteC (2005) Social networks and Internet connectivity effects. Information, Communication & Society8(2): 125–147.
18.
HoganB (2010) The presentation of self in the age of social media: distinguishing performances and exhibitions online. Bulletin of Science Technology & Society30(6): 377–386.
19.
LampeCEllisonNSteinfieldC (2007) A Familiar Face(book): profile elements as signals in an online social network. In: Proceedings of the 2007 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM, pp. 435–444.
20.
LenhartA (2009) Adults and Social Network Websites. Washington, DC: Pew Internet Project.
21.
LewisJWestA (2009) ‘Friending’: London-based undergraduates’ experience of Facebook. New Media & Society11(7): 1209–1229.
22.
LinN (2001) Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action. London: Cambridge University Press.
23.
LincolnYSGubaEG (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
24.
MaddenMZickuhrK (2011) 65% of Online Adults Use Social Networking Sites. Washington, DC: Pew Internet Project.
25.
MarwickAboydd (2011) I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society13(1): 114–133.
26.
MilesMBHubermanAM (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd edn.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
27.
MorrisMRTeevanJPanovichK (2010) What do people ask their social networks, and why? A survey study of status message Q&A behavior. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM, pp. 1739–1748.
28.
PetronioS (2002) Boundaries of Privacy. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
29.
PutnamR (2000) Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster.
30.
StraussACorbinJ (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2nd edn.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
31.
TurnerJWGrubeJAMeyersJ (2001), Developing an optimal match within online communities: an exploration of CMC support communities and traditional support. Journal of Communication51: 231–251.
32.
VitakJEllisonNSteinfieldC (2011) The ties that bond: re-examining the relationship between Facebook use and bonding social capital. In: Proceedings of the 44th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. New York: Computer Society Press.
33.
WaltherJB (1992) Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: a relational perspective. Communication Research19(1), 52−90.
34.
WeissRS (1974) The provisions of social relationships. In: RubinZ (ed.) Doing Unto Others. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, pp. 17–26.
35.
WellmanBWortleyS (1990) Different strokes from different folks: community ties and social support. American Journal of Sociology96(3): 558–588.
36.
WestALewisJCurrieP (2009) Students’ Facebook ‘friends’: public and private spheres. Journal of Youth Studies12(6): 615–627.
37.
WilliamsD (2006) On and off the Net: scales for social capital in an online era. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication11(2): 593–628.
38.
YangJMorrisMTeevanJ. (2011) Culture matters: a survey study of social Q&A behavior. In:Proceedings of The Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press, pp. 409–416.
39.
YoderCStutzmanF (2011) Identifying social capital in the Facebook interface. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors on Computing Systems. New York: ACM, pp. 585–588.
