People of all ages are increasingly exposed to online environments that encourage them to share and connect with others. However, there is a perception that adolescents are particularly susceptible to these cues and share more online than do other age groups. With a group of 288 adolescents and 285 adults, we explored differences and similarities in use of Facebook for information sharing and use of the controls to protect their privacy. Adolescents reported disclosing more information on Facebook and using the privacy settings less than adults. Despite these differences, the results indicated that adolescents and adults were more similar than different in the factors that predicted information disclosure and control. Adolescents spent more time on Facebook, which partially mediated the relationship between group (adolescents vs. adults) and disclosure. Self-esteem partially mediated the relationship between group and information control, with adults having higher self-esteem than adolescents.
AltmanI. (1975). The environment and social behavior. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
2.
BanduraA. (2001). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. Mediapsychology, 3, 265–299.
3.
BaronR. M.KennyD. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.
boydd. m. (2007). Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In BuckinghamD. (Ed.), McArthur foundation series on digital learning—Youth, identity, and digital media volume. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6.
BuffardiL. E.CampbellW. K. (2008). Narcissism and social networking web sites. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1303–1324.
7.
BurkeM.MarlowC.LentoT. (2009). Feed me: Motivating newcomer contribution in social networking sites. Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 945–954.
8.
ChristofidesE.MuiseA.DesmaraisS. (2009). Information disclosure and control on Facebook: Are they two sides of the same coin or two different processes?. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12, 341–345.
9.
CouchL. L.JonesW. H. (1997). Measuring levels of trust. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 319–336.
10.
EllisonN. B.SteinfeldC.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.
FogelJ.NehmadE. (2009). Internet social network communities: Risk taking, trust, and privacy concerns. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 153–160.
13.
GangadharbatlaH. (2008). Facebook me: Collective self-esteem, need to belong, and Internet self-efficacy as predictors of the igeneration’s attitudes toward social networking sites. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 8, 5–15.
14.
GoslingS. D.AugustineA. A.VazireS.HoltzmanN.GaddisS.. Manifestations of personality in online social networks: Self-reported Facebook-related behaviors and observable profile information. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. Advance online publication. doi:10.1089/cyber.2010.0087.
15.
HendersonS.GildingM. (2004). “I’ve never clicked this much with anyone in my life”: Trust and hyperpersonal communication in online friendship. New Media & Society, 6, 487–506.
16.
LarsonR. W.RichardsM. H. (1991). Daily companionship in late childhood and early adolescence: Changing developmental contexts. Child Development, 62, 284–300.
17.
LivingstoneS. (2008). Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: Teenager’s use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression. New Media & Society, 10, 393–411.
18.
MacDermidS. M.FranzC. E.De ReusL. A. (1998). Generativity: At the crossroads of social roles and personality. In McAdamsD. P.de St. AubinE. (Eds.), Generativity and adult development: How and why we care for the next generation (pp. 181–226). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
19.
MacKinnonD. P.WarsiG.DwyerJ. H. (1995). A simulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 30, 41–62.
20.
MooreS.GulloneE. (1996). Predicting adolescent risk behavior using a personalized cost-benefit analysis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 25, 343–359.
SantorD. A.MesserveyD.KusumakarV. (2000). Measuring peer pressure, popularity and conformity in adolescent boys and girls. Predicting school performance, school attitudes and substance abuse. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29, 163–182.
25.
SotoC. J.JohnO. P.GoslingS. D.PotterJ. (2011). Age differences in personality traits from 10 to 65: Big five domains and facets in a large cross-sectional sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 330–348.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. (5th ed). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
28.
TapscottD. (2009). Grown up digital. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
29.
TrzesniewskiK. H.DonnellanM. B.RobinsR. W. (2003). Stability of self-esteem across the lifespan. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 205–220.
30.
WestinA. F. (1967). Privacy and freedom. New York, NY: Atheneum.
31.
WolfeM.LauferR. (1974). The concept of privacy in childhood and adolescence. Paper presented at the Environmental Design Research Association, Milwaukee, WI.
32.
ZhaoS.GrasmuckS.MartinJ. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 1816–1836.
