Personal branding on Facebook : how can an individual create a good personal brand online?

Personal branding on Facebook

How can an individual create a good personal brand online?

Master Thesis

Octavia-Georgiana Burghelea | 11084723 | octavia.georgiana@gmail.com Faculty of Economics and Business

Supervisor: Dhr. Drs. Ing. A.C.J. (Antoon) Meulemans

Second supervisor:

~ 2 ~

Preface

This document is written by Octavia Georgiana Burghelea for the finishing of the Master’s program in “Business Administration – Marketing Track” at the University of Amsterdam. The copyright of this paper rests with the author, who declares to take full responsibility for the contents reported. Amsterdam Business School and University of Amsterdam are only responsible for the educational coaching and cannot be held liable for the contents.

I would here like to thank my supervisor, Antoon Meulemans, for giving his time, valuable inputs, enthusiasm and support throughout the whole thesis period. I would also like to thank to all participants for the survey as well as for the interviews for their time and valuable input.

Finally, a special thanks goes to my family and close friends, who constantly encouraged and supported me through the entire process.

~ 3 ~

Table of Contents

2.2 Online platforms and social media ... 11

2.3 Facebook ... 12

2.4 Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions ... 13

2.5 Eysenck Personality test ... 16

2.6 Introversion/Extraversion and Collectivism/Individualism in cultures ... 18

2.7 The self and the usage of Internet ... 18

2.8 Research model survey ... 20

2.9 Research model interviews ... 20

3 Research Methodology ... 21 3.1 Survey ... 21 3.1.1. Sample ... 21 3.1.2.Variables ... 22 3.1.3. Statistical procedure ... 24 3.2 Interviews ... 25 3.2.1. Sample ... 26 3.2.2.Variables ... 26 3.2.3. Statistical procedure ... 27

~ 4 ~

4 Research Findings ... 28

4.1 Survey findings ... 28

4.1.1. Conclusions survey findings ... 33

4.2 Interviews findings ... 34

5 Discussion ... 43

5.1 Discussion of the research findings ... 43

5.2 Theoretical contributions of the study ... 45

5.3 Managerial implications of the study... 46

6. Limitation of the study and suggestions for future research ... 47

6.1. Limitations ... 47 6.2. Further research ... 47 7 References ... 49 8 Appendices ... 52 8.1. Survey questions ... 52 8.2 Interviews questions ... 53 8.3. Interviews transcripts ... 54 8.4. Interviews summary ... 130

~ 5 ~

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between the personality of an individual and the usage of social media platforms (with a focus on Facebook) in creating an online personal brand.

The present research builds on several concepts in the existing literature such as personal branding, Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, social media platforms, Facebook research and Eysenck’s personality questionnaire. Its aim is to understand better the concept of personal branding in the online environment. Also, it provides academic evidence on why we should be careful what we put on the Internet and how we express ourselves.

Data was collected using both quantitative and qualitative methods. Firstly, a survey was conducted and 82 respondents participated from countries around the world. In the first part of the survey, they had to answer 12 questions from the Eysenck’s personality questionnaire – short version regarding extraversion. In the second part, questions about the activity and usage of Facebook were asked such as rate of posts and account privacy. Secondly, 12 people were interviewed from different cultures. 10 interviewees were students and 2 interviewees were a current and a former recruiter who use Facebook to screen candidates for a certain job position.

Findings suggest that there is a need to create a positive and strong personal brand online no matter the field of work in which you are active in. Moreover, this brand has to be in line with how you present yourself in the real world. As the Internet and the social media platforms are becoming more and more a part of our daily lives, they will soon be used as a primary source of forming a first impression of the individual. Therefore, there is a need to build a common framework that can provide some guidelines on how an individual can manage his/her personal and professional life on these platforms without damaging his/her career. Also, it is important to know how to make use of Facebook and the tools it provides in order to create a positive and strong online personal brand and attract audience (i.e. in the case of entrepreneurs).

~ 6 ~

1. Introduction

Nowadays, the concept of personal branding has caught everyone’s attention. It is not only a part of a celebrity’s life – individuals are also becoming more and more aware of the fact that appearance counts and first impressions are hard to change, especially if these are formed primarily by assessing one’s online profile. It is no wonder that, in the last decade, many self gurus, self-branding books, personal coaches and career advisors made their way into the spotlight by promising individuals to help them understand what their brand is and how to take control of it (Shepherd, 2005). Otherwise, as Kaputa (2005) stated: “If you do not brand yourself, you give the others the power to do it.” (Kaputa, 2005 in Shepherd, 2005)

It is believed that the concept of personal branding relates to corporate branding which states that every brand has several personality traits with which consumers can identify. Aaker (1997) defined brand personality as: “(…) the set of human characteristics associated with a brand” Aaker (1997). Therefore, in order to create a self-brand, an individual needs to have a set of characteristics that are appealing to his/her “consumers”. Moreover, Aaker’s (1997) study is based on the idea that brands can have five distinct personality dimensions: Sincerity, Excitement, Competence, Sophistication and Ruggedness. The findings revealed that, when analyzing the structure of a brand and of the human personality, there is an asymmetry in the relationship – only 3 elements of the brand are found also in the personality of human beings. Therefore, personal branding can be viewed as having more and different variables that must be discovered and analyzed in more depth. Personal branding has not been seen so far as an academic subject. However, with the arrival of technology and the fast development of new tools that are currently available, people are starting to take notice of this trend and to ask more about it. Therefore, individuals need to understand this phenomenon and know which factors can lead to building a strong and positive online personal brand. In most of the cases, an online profile influences even the recruitment process of a company. There are many social platforms on which one can build a brand. Several researches have been already conducted in some areas. For example, Chen (2013) discovered that YouTube facilitates the individual to express himself/herself freely while inducing a bi-directional relationship between the audience and the individual thus creating stronger connections between the 2. These finding are in line with what O’Brien (2011) argues in his paper regarding the power of the online

~ 7 ~

consumers and how individuals are becoming more and more aware of the benefits of the social media platforms.

Moreover, a 2015 study aimed at finding out how a job seeker’s self-presentation displayed on LinkedIn can influence the recruiter’s decision in the hiring process (Chiang & Suen, 2015). The key variables that play an important role in self-presenting and on which recruiters emphasize on were found to be: profile summary, work experience and educational background. This study is of big interest to the job seekers because it helps them optimize their online profile, improve their personal brand and get an interview by using the Web 2.0 tools which are at his disposal.

More and more research is tapping into all these social media platforms as studies try to find out their role and how the virtual self is influencing the perception of the real life individual.

The present research is trying to get a glimpse at what makes a good online profile and search if there is a difference between why introverts and extraverts across the world use these social media platforms. .

1.1.Problem definition

Although some research has been already conducted in the online personal branding concept, little is still known in the academic world about this process. Moreover, there is insufficient evidence to understand the gap between how individuals think they are portraying themselves online and how they are actually perceived by their audience. Also, they must know if the way there are advertising themselves on the online platforms is the proper way to deliver their message.

Research question: To what extend are personality and personal branding moderated by culture? To what extend similarities exist between how introverts and extraverts are branding themselves on Facebook?

1.2.Theoretical contributions

The research will contribute to the academia by providing further insights into personal branding, a concept that is well-known today but which was not researched that much from the individual’s perspective, especially in the online environment.

~ 8 ~

Moreover, individuals need to know how they can use the social media platforms for displaying their personal lives without it interfering and influencing their professional life in a bad way. Also, a common framework will be developed, with some key points on what to do and what to not do while managing your online profiles.

1.3.Managerial contributions

This will impact how managers are branding themselves on the online platforms and give some advice on how to approach this strategy correctly.

As the previous studies showed, the company or the organization can gain a lot if people from higher positions construct their brand on the same values. Therefore, managers must make the difference between their social and professional life when displaying it on the online platforms and be careful not to hurt the image of the company in the process.

Moreover, for the Millennials, this research can be a good start in showing them how to start creating a professional self on the online environment and manage this persona in such a way that they do not jeopardize their future careers.

1.4.Structure of the thesis

Section 2 provides an overview of the current literature on personal branding, social media platforms, Facebook, Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, Eysenck’s Personality Test, the relationship between the culture and the introversion/extraversion level of the individuals as well as on the level of originality of the individual on the social media platforms. The conceptual models of the research for both the survey and the interviews are presented at the end of this section. In Section 3, the research method of both the survey and the interviews is explained. This includes the sample, the variables as well as the statistical procedure. Section 4 presents the main findings of the survey and the interview. Afterwards, in section 5, these findings are further discussed and some remarks are outlined as well as the academic and managerial implications. Last but not least, in Section 6 there is the limitations of the study and several recommendations for further research.

~ 9 ~

2. Literature review

The literature review is the core and the starting point of this study. Firstly, the concept of personal branding, social media and Facebook are introduced. Then, Eysenck’s personality test questions about introversion and extraversion as well as Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are explained in detail and linked together in subchapter 2.6. Subchapter 2.7 poses the question: “To what extend are we our true self online?” and reviews some of the literature already present in the academia. Also, the hypotheses are developed. The chapter ends with the research model for the survey and for the interviews.

2.1.Personal branding

The concept of personal branding was first introduced in the online world in a 1997 article posted in FastCompany magazine by Tom Peters. He stated that: “Regardless of age, regardless of position, regardless of the business we happen to be in, all of us need to understand the importance of branding. We are CEOs of our own companies: Me Inc. To be in business today, our most important job is to be head marketer for the brand called You.” (Peters, 1997). Since then, a new industry was born and people started to buy books and to go to career advisors to learn the rules of the new game.

There was no significant academic research on the concept until Sheperd (2005) decided to go into more detail and analyze it from the marketing discipline point of view. His research aimed at revealing if there can be a coherent statement of personal branding that can be supported by gurus, personal branding books and personal coaches. The finds revealed gaps, missing elements, contradictions and logical failures in approaching the subject thus little concrete and valid information being actually known about the concept of personal branding. It was concluded that further research needs to be conducted in order to see if the marketing discipline can reclaim this from the non-academics and provide a feasible framework which can be applied on a general level. Since then, some definitions of what personal branding might be started to appear in the academia and researchers began to explore the subject in more depth. For example, personal branding can be seen as a way to differentiate yourself from the crowd, as Arruda (2005) stated: “Nurturing your brand will ensure that you get out in front of the pack”. Karaduman (2013) defines personal

~ 10 ~

branding as: ”The process whereby people and their careers are marked as brands (…) It is directly intended to create an asset and brand equity that pertains to a particular person or individual.” Furthermore, Chen (2013) linked the concept with “self-presentation” which is used by an individual to create and maintain a certain imagine of himself/herself.

These definitions are still valid today. However, a new environment has been added to it – the digital presence of the self (Powell, 2014). In the last years, people started to understand the benefits of the social media environment and became more and more aware of the fact that their virtual representations can reach and help to create a global network. In the Web 2.0 era, tools that can be used for self-promotion include: social media profiles, personal websites and blogs. As Bob Baker argued in his book: “The key to establishing a personal brand identity in the cyber world is focusing on who you are and what you stand for and then getting the word out through a variety of Internet channels that are frequented by the people most likely to be interested in your message” (Baker, 2001, in Wei and Yi, 2012)

In a 2013 study, Chen (2013) found that the YouTube online platform is much more efficient for amateurs to use than turning to the traditional media agency system. This platform facilitates a bidirectional brand relationship in which the amateurs interact with the audience thus allowing the creation of a stronger personal brands, mainly due to the feedback received. This social performance is most of the times compared with a show, in which the protagonist displays a certain image and tries to adjusted and maintain it in order to create a positive view of the self. (Goffman, 1959, in Chen, 2013).

The use of a search optimization technique can also lead to easier access to one’s online information (Labrecque, Markos & Milne, 2011). The same research revealed that personal branding is unavoidable in the online environment and authenticity plays an important part in

personal branding as people who found unauthentic profiles tended to ignore them – this suggests

that the “fake it ‘till you make it” rule is not valid anymore (Powell, 2014).

Karaduman (2013) explored the idea that there is a strong link between the corporation’s perceived image by consumers and the personal image of the top level executives in the online environment. It was found that a successful personal brand might also contribute to the success of the brand that a company possesses. Another research showed that non-profit organizations can also increase awareness if their executives have a strong online personal brand which is in line with the organization’s values (Nolan, 2014).

~ 11 ~

Adding to this separation between the personal and professional life, Labrecque, Markos and Milne (2011) research aimed at observing and interviewing both the user of a Facebook profile and the viewer in order to find out the gap between how users think that they are branding themselves and how the others actually perceive them. The research revealed that misdirect branding has implications for the professional life whereas insufficient branding is critical for the social status of the individual. It was concluded that further research needs to be done in order to separate or create a new framework that can integrate both professional and social life.

2.2. Online platforms and social media

It is no secret that online platforms had facilitated the connection between people and made our lives more convenient. Nowadays, it is easier to stay in touch, to make international connections as well as to reach a broader audience by using all of these tools.

Together with the new version of the Web 2.0, journalists are no longer considered as the main authoritative source for information as consumers slowly shifted towards curated content from experts in a specific field (DiMauro Auditore and Bulmer 2012). Moreover, social media is slowly becoming a serious environment due to the fact that people with expertise use content to elevate their personal brand by associating themselves with the information they share. However, there is a difference between an advocate and an influencer meaning that even if someone is knowledgeable and credible about a certain topic, (s)he might not be perceived as an influencer (DiMauro Auditore and Bulmer, 2012).

Some people tend to believe that the virtual world is not a projection of reality and that individuals are using them to create a better version of the self. However, Schau and Gilly (2003) found out that, when faced with the possibility of creating a better-virtual version of oneself, individuals tend to adopt self-presenting strategies which are in line with the real life. Moreover, users seem to be using the online platforms for real life employment, meeting new people and even to find out solutions for different problems. Suffice it to say, the majority of the people use social media platforms to self-promote themselves and manage to keep a sort of consistency between their real life and the virtual one.

However, the line between the personal and professional life is becoming more and more blurred as employers chose to screen the social media profiles of the job applicants in order to access

~ 12 ~

information that is not easy to find out from a resume or an interview. It has been shown that some of the reasons for screening out applicants were the provocative, inappropriate content as well as revealing information that are not in line with the qualifications one has in his resume. (Brown and Vaughn, 2011)

Therefore, in this digital era, an individual needs to know how to properly advertise himself as well as to create an online image that will not damage his future career goals.

2.3. Facebook

In the last couple of years, Facebook has become the online platform of first choice for many individuals especially youngsters. Companies are not excluded from the picture, as managers use Facebook to advertise their brands and to keep in touch with consumers. Consequently, the way one advertises oneself on this platform matters a lot.

Blachnio, Przepiorkaa and Rudnickab (2015) divided users of Facebook into two categories: those

with high self-esteem and those with low self-esteem and compared the importance that the two groups give to their profiles. Not surprisingly, people with a low self-esteem were found to use Facebook to improve their self-image. Moreover, Facebook can be seen as useful for both extraverts but mostly for introverts because it helps them to brand themselves and create connections that might be hard to get a start on in real life.

However, can it be stated that Facebook is indeed an appropriate online platform for personal branding? On the one hand, in a 2015 research, Brettel, Reich, Gavilanes and Flatten (2015)

measured the effect of Facebook “Likes” and other stimuli on the sales of a specific product. The findings showed that Facebook advertising can affect sales especially on the long term through “Likes” and comments. From the two, “Likes” are most of the times seen as an indicator of content quality. Through Facebook, users also spread Electronic Word-Of-Mouth (e-WOM), thus making it easy for the individuals who self-promote themselves on this platform to reach a broader network of people.

On the other hand, findings of a 2012 research added to the idea that there is a disconnection

between the “Likes” and the actual brand consumption (Nelson-Field, Riebe and Sharp 2012). This

can also explain the fact of why fans “Like” a product but in some cases they do not buy it. Facebook fans can be seen as assets for a brand but there is a need for further research on

~ 13 ~

understanding their motives and reasons for their “Likes” (Wallace, Buil, de Chernatony and Hogan, 2014). However, it is stated that the number of fans a Facebook page has cannot determine whether you are appreciated or not. The variables that play an important role in this equation are the rate of engagement with your consumers and the creation of loyalty. (Hollis, 2011). Further research needs to be conducted in order to find out which other variables can lead to building up a good self-image on Facebook and how an individual can get the most out of his online profile. The Labrecque, Markos and Milne (2011) research revealed that the content the friends of the participants posted in form of comments and photo tagging on their profile was influencing negatively their personal image. Furthermore, some participants were thinking of closing their Facebook account because of the amount of information that the platform actually has and can disclose about them and which leads to building up a negative online image.

2.4. Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions

"Culture is the collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from others" (Hofstede, 2011)

In his research, Hofstede (1980) discovered that there are 3 levels of uniqueness in mental programs: individual, collective and universal.

The “universal level” includes several expression behaviors (i.e. sadness, laughing) as well as associative and aggressive behaviors.

The “collective level” is shared only among some people. Some examples can include the language one uses to express him/herself, the way one eats, one loves, the physical distance one keeps between himself and the others in order to feel comfortable (i.e. introverts and extraverts). The “individual level” is unique – no two people are programmed exactly the same even though they are twins, triplets or quintuplets. (Hofstede, 1980)

The universal level is the one we inherit, at the individual level a part of our programming must be inherited whereas at the collective level most of our mental programming is learned – we share similar traits with people who went through the same learning process but do not have the same genes. (Hofstede, 1980)

~ 14 ~

Hofstede revealed 5 different cultural dimensions: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism Vs. collectivism, masculinity Vs. Femininity and long term Vs. short term orientation. (Hofstede, 1991, in Hofstede 2011).

Power distance refers to the extent to which the less powerful members of an organization accept the unequal distribution of power. There are 2 dimensions: small power distance and large power distance. In small power distance cultures, there is an even distribution of power and people treat others like equals. On the other side, in large power distance, power is a basic fact of society and there is a clear and structured hierarchy in which equality is not present. Power distance was found to be higher in East European, Latin, Asian and African countries and lower in Germanic and English-speaking Western countries (Hofstede, 2011).

The second cultural dimension, uncertainty avoidance, describes a society’s tolerance for ambiguity meaning that some cultures might deal better and feel more comfortable in unstructured situations. In weak uncertainty avoidance, people are comfortable with ambiguity and chaos, rules are not that well accepted and there is a lower level of stress and anxiety. In strong uncertainty avoidance there a lot of rules and laws which aim at avoiding the unknown and the main belief is in the ultimate truth which the culture strongly believes that it possesses. Cultures which are higher in uncertainty avoidance are East and Central European countries, in Latin countries, in Japan and in German speaking countries whereas English speaking, Nordic and Chinese culture countries are lower in uncertainty avoidance. (Hofstede, 2011).

The individualistic and collectivistic countries were analyzed based on the degree to which people in a society are integrated in groups. In the individualistic countries, people are expected to look after themselves and those who are really close (i.e. relatives) whereas in the collectivistic countries individuals grow up in a larger circle and they must take care of the extended family (i.e. aunts, grandparents). In a nut shell, on the one hand, individualistic countries focus more on an “I”- consciousness, others are perceived as individuals, personal opinion is really important and tasks prevail over relationships. On the other hand, collective countries have a “We”-consciousness, others are classified in in-groups or out-groups and relationships prevail over tasks. Individualism was found in developed and Western countries, while collectivism is present in less developed and Eastern countries; Japan takes a middle position on this dimension (Hofstede, 2011).

~ 15 ~

As a societal and not an individual characteristic, the 4th dimension is masculinity and femininity, with masculinity being the assertive pole and femininity being the modest one. In feminine countries, both genders have the same modest, caring traits of character whereas in masculine cultures, both genders are competitive and assertive and there is a gap between the men’s and women’s values. The study revealed that there is a high level of masculinity in Japan, in German speaking countries, and in some Latin countries like Italy and Mexico and moderately high in English speaking Western countries. Moreover, it is low in Nordic countries and in the Netherlands and moderately low in some Latin and Asian countries like France, Spain, Portugal, Chile, Korea and Thailand. (Hofstede, 2011).

Last but not least, the long-term vs. short-term orientation dimension focuses on whether important events took place in the past/in the moment or in the future. Countries with a short-term orientation tend to think that everything is constant (i.e. a good person will always be good) and individuals will tend to attribute success and failure to luck. The main cultures where short-term orientation is present are U.S.A. and Australia, Latin American, African and Muslim countries. The opposite of it, the long-term cultures, tend to think more and live in the future where the success and failure is assessed based on the amount of effort one puts into it. The long-term oriented cultures are East Asian countries, Eastern- and Central Europe, South- and North-European and South Asian countries are more medium term orientated. (Hofstede, 2011)

In 2010, a sixth dimension was added and entitled indulgence vs. restraint. This dimension is negatively weakly correlated with the short-term Vs long-term orientation. On the one hand, indulgence refers to those cultures where there is a relatively free gratification of basic and natural human desires related to enjoying life and having fun. This can be found in countries such as South and North America, in Western Europe and in parts of Sub-Sahara Africa. On the other hand, restraint refers to a society which controls the freedom of needs of the individuals by strict social norms. Countries in which restraint was found as a main culture characteristic were Eastern Europe, Asia and the Muslim world. (Hofstede, 2011)

~ 16 ~

The personality tests have been developing a lot in the last couple of years. From the early Maudsley Medical Questionnaire (MMQ) which contained 40 items up to the original version of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) which compresses 90 questions as well as the Revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQR) which contains 100 items. This increase can be accounted for the different dimensions of personalities which have been added in order to enhance the reliability of the test (Francis and Philipchalk, 1992).

The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire developed by Eysenck and Eysenck (1975) has been used by researchers as a primary tool in their studies to collect, measure and compare data between

different cultures and countries (Barrett, Petrides, Eysenck, Eysenck, 1998). The purpose of the

study was to establish a global psychometric scale of Extraversion (E), Neuroticism (N), Social desirability (L) and Psychoticism (P). The deduction of the researchers after they analyzed the data was that psychometric measures of P, E and N are universally across countries and cultures. The Extraversion (E) scorer is described as being sociable, someone who likes parties, has a lot of friends and needs to be surrounded by people all the time and who is most of the times impulsive and takes a lot of risks. (Miles and Hempel, 2004)

A high Neuroticism (N) score reveals an individual who is usually moody, depressed, anxious and worried. He/she might be really emotional, taking everything personal and reacting strongly to stimuli and after every arousing experience he/she finds it hard to go back to how things were before. (Miles and Hempel, 2004)

A high scorer in psychoticism will be non-conformist, cold, impersonal, aggressive and tough-minded. Moreover, this category of individuals might also be antisocial and prone to Machiavellianism. (Miles and Hempel, 2004)

~ 17 ~

Major Scale Type of item Item

Extraversion

Positive Do you like telling jokes and funny stories to your

friends?

Negative Do you prefer reading instead of meeting new people?

Neuroticism

Positive Are you a worrier?

Negative Do you feel a sense of calm and contentment most of the

times?

Psychoticism

Positive Do you enjoy hurting people you love?

Negative Would it upset you to see a child or an animal suffer?

Social

desirability

Positive Are you always willing to admit when you have made a

mistake?

Negative Have you ever cheated at a game?

Table: Example of items of the EPQ-R (Miles and Hempel, 2004)

In their work, Eysenck, Eysenck and Barrett (1985) designed a shorter form of the EPQ-R in which each of the 4 indices (extraversion, neuroticism, psychoticism and lie) contain 12 questions. This version of 48 questions can be useful when time is of the essence in a research project as well as when one wants to be sure that respondents do not give up in taking the tests due to the fact that there are too many questions that they have to answer to.

This study focuses on the introversion and extraversion of the individuals. Therefore only the questions regarding E from the EPQR – short version will be applied, measured and discussed. According to Eysenck’s theory, on the one hand, extraverts are easily bored, and need external stimulation to bring up their level of performance. Moreover, they are outgoing, talkative, high on positive affect and enjoy being surrounded by people. On the other hand, the introverts need peace and quiet around them in order to be active and enjoy mostly being by themselves. 68% of the population was found to be in between the two concepts, meaning that they are ambiverted. (Eysenck et al., 1985)

~ 18 ~

2.6. Introversion/Extraversion and Collectivism/Individualism in cultures

“Personality is the interactive aggregate of personal characteristics that influence an individual's response to the environment.” (Guilford, 1959, in Hofstede and Hofstede, 2001, page 31)

One definition of culture states that: “Culture is the interactive aggregate of common characteristics that influence a human group's response to its environment.” (Hofstede, 2011) Therefore, one can say that culture determines the identity of a human group in the same way that personality determines the identity of an individual.

Moreover, psychological anthropology represents the interaction of the culture and personality meaning that cultural traits can sometimes be measured by personality tests. (Hofstede, 1980) When putting together Hofstede’s cultural dimension of individualism and collectivism and the two dimensions of personality, there are significant similarities between the collectivistic countries and extraverts personality traits as well as between the individualistic cultures and introverted people. Thus, one can state that, collectivistic countries are more extraverted whereas individualistic countries tend to be more introverted.

2.7. The self and the usage of Internet – Are we ourselves or do we create an alter ego online?

Amichai, Wainapel and Fox (2002) found out that introverted people locate the “real me” on the

Internet whereas extraverted people still rely on the traditional social interactions as a main source of authenticity and real self - display. The expression of the “real self” is a really important part in an individual’s life and, even though some sceptics might argue that the virtual world is a replacement for the real world, introverts seem to need these tools in order to express themselves and their ideas as they cannot do this that often in real life. Introverts do not lose their authenticity on the road – the Internet just provides them with the possibility of creating a relationship and approaching someone first in the online environment. The conversation is afterwards moved into the real world, where the introverts feel more comfortable to be themselves once they know at least a little bit the person sitting in front of them.

Moreover, Amiel and Sargent (2004) research revealed the fact that extraverts use Facebook to voice their opinions, share interests and good moments with people. Therefore, they are not

~ 19 ~

replacing face-to-face social activities with the virtual environment – in the end, they appreciate more the real world because they can have the immediate social contact which keeps them going. H1: Introverts will post more frequently than extraverts.

H2: Introverts have more pictures with themselves whereas extraverts have mainly pictures with others such as family and friends.

However, the personalities of the individuals are influenced by multiple factors with culture being one of the most important one. An individual grows up in a certain environment that shapes him and helps him grow up, therefore, the introverts and extraverts might act and socialize differently across the world.

H1.1: Individualists will post more than collectivists.

H2.1: Individualists have more pictures with themselves whereas collectivists have mainly pictures with others.

When talking about why individuals use these virtual platforms, there are two concepts that can explain the relationship between one’s personality and usage of Facebook. One of them is “the social compensation” theory and it states that introverts gain more from the usage of the social media platforms because it offers them the possibility of compensating for their relatively weak skills of socializing face-to-face with someone. The second theory, “richer get richer”, states that extraverts gain more as their real life relationships are translated into the virtual world. (Ong, Ang, Ho, Lim, Goh, Lee and Chua, 2010)

McKenna, Green and Gleason (2002) concluded their study regarding the formation of

relationships using the Internet with the following concept: “Rather than turning to the Internet as a way of hiding from real life and from forming real relationships, individuals use it as a means not only of maintaining ties with existing family and friends but also of forming close and meaningful new relationships in a relatively nonthreatening environment. The Internet may also be helpful for those who have difficulty forging relationships in face-to-face situations because of shyness, social anxiety, or a lack of social skills.” (McKenna et al, 2002)

Taking this into consideration, it can be hypothesized that:

H3: Introverts focus more on meeting new people and extraverts use it for keeping in touch with people.

~ 20 ~

H3.1: Individualists use Facebook mainly for networking and meeting new people whereas collectivists use it to network and to keep in touch with people.

H4: Introverts keep their profiles public whereas extraverts keep their profiles private.

H4.1: Individualists have their profile public whereas collectivists keep their profiles more private.

2.8. Research model survey

In the previous sections, 4 hypotheses were established. The first set of hypotheses form the main model of the research whereas the secondary ones aim at examining if there are any cultural differences regarding the personality of the individuals.

2.9. Research model interviews

For the interviews, a different model was constructed. This approach was adopted because the interviews looked at the bigger picture and searched for deep insights in the problem. The overall concept was to see how introverts and extraverts are branding themselves online and if culture moderates the relationship or individuals have the same ideas and views on the usage of Facebook.

Introverts/ Extraverts H1: Rate of posts H2: Picture types H3: Facebook Usage H4: Account privacy Culture Introverts/ Extraverts Personal branding online Culture

~ 21 ~

3. Research Methodology

This chapter represents the beginning of the empirical part of the research. Firstly, the survey variables will be discussed together with the data which was collected and afterwards analyzed by using SPSS. Secondly, interviews will be discussed, explained and analyzed using NVivo. Last but not least, a brief description of the statistical approach will be provided for both analyses.

3.1.

Survey

The survey was used as a starting point for the research. In order to conduct the interviews, the researcher needed some information on how introverts and extraverts use different features and tools of Facebook. The findings from the survey were then compared with the findings from the interviews to see whether or not there is a consistency in responses. Moreover, for 2 out of the 4 hypotheses there was not enough evidence to validate them. These were further discussed in the interviews. Therefore, the survey acted as a support for the structure of the interview questions as well as for validating or not the interview findings. In addition to that, the survey helped gathering links to Facebook profiles (participants were asked to leave a link of their profiles if they wished or not to participate in the second part of the research), which were used in the interviews – participants were asked to comment on the profiles and point out which are the good and which are the bad features an individual has on his/her profile and whether or not this affects the image they are maybe trying to create in real life.

3.1.1 Sample

The sample consisted of individuals between 18 and 30 years old. The survey was send in using electronic platforms such as emails and social media platforms. There were 98 surveys started, out of which 82 were completed leading to a 84% response rate. 58 were females and the rest, 24, were males. The respondents were from different countries around the world such as Romania, The Netherlands, Italy, France, Switzerland and Germany. Moreover, through the questionnaire, 12 Facebook profiles were collected from the respondents (they had the free option of sharing the link to their profile for the second part of the study). This information was collected in order to check for the validity of the responses (i.e. check if extraverts post more pictures with other people) as well as to show them to the interviewees in the second part of the research and ask for their opinion on them.

~ 22 ~

The independent variable was the personality of the individual (introvert or extravert). The dependent variables were rate of posts (H1), Facebook pictures (H2), usage of Facebook (H3) and privacy of the account (H4). The moderator of the relationship was culture.

The questionnaire was divided into 2 sections.

The first part included a personality test based on the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised - Short Form (EPQR-S; Eysenck et al., 1985). The short version of the test includes 48 items in total and 4 subscales which are Extraversion, Neuroticism, Psychoticism and Lie. Only the first 12 questions regarding extraversion were addressed. This was done in order to assess the degree of extraversion or introversion of the respondents.

Eysenck personality test – short version

12 questions from the EPQR – short version were used in order to measure the extraversion level of the respondents. The questions had a 4 point Linkert-scale, from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Individuals who scored between 0 and 2.95 were labeled as introverts and those who scored above 3 fell in the extraverts’ category.

The second part of the test contained questions regarding an individual’s Facebook activity such as rate of posts, pictures, profile options and usage (see appendix for full questionnaire).

Rate of posts

The Rate of posts was measured on a 3 point scale containing the values: “once per week”, “once per month” and “never”. The aim of this variable was to find out if introverts tend to post more than extroverts and if so to which degree they do so. This was an important issue which needed to be discussed because, as the literature stated, introverts might tend to be more active on the social media in order to compensate with the lack of interaction in real life.

Picture types

This dependent variable was measured on a 4-point Linkert-Scale, with the following values: “strongly disagree”, “disagree”, “agree” and “strongly agree”. It measured to what extend do

~ 23 ~

introverts post more pictures with themselves or with landscapes versus extraverts who post more pictures with friends and family. The literature states that extraverts will post ore pictures with friends and families as it is an extension of their offline life whereas introverts might tend to keep it more personal and not post too many pictures with other people.

Facebook usage

When talking about why do introverts and extroverts use Facebook, the dependent variable aimed to measure the degree to which introverts use it to create new relationships and extraverts use it to keep in touch with friends and family. This variable was measured on a 4-point Linkert scale just like mentioned above: “strongly disagree”, “disagree”, “agree” and “strongly agree”. In the previous studies it has been shown that it is easier for introverts to meet new people online and that in many cases they will go with this alternative.

Account privacy

Do introverts tend to keep their profiles more public so that they can reveal more about themselves to the others on the social media platforms or not? This dependent variable was measured on a 4 point-Linkert scale: “strongly disagree”, “disagree”, “agree” and “strongly agree”. It aimed at revealing whether extraverts keep their profile mostly private as they do not search for creating new relationships and if introverts prefer to keep it open to the public.

Culture

The moderator of the relationship was “culture”. It has been found in literature that the country where an individual is born and raised influences the degree of extraversion (collective Vs. individualist countries). (McCrae and Terracciano, 2005)

Taking into consideration the characteristics of collectivistic countries (i.e. “we”-consciousness, languages in which the word “I” is avoided, the opinions and votes predetermined by the group and everyone is loyal to an extended group of parents, friends, aunts, uncles, grandparents from early birth), those of the individualist countries (i.e. “I consciousness, the word “I” is indispensable in the language, personal opinion is expected and people vote individually and everyone is expected to take care of their family and really close friends). (Hofstede, 2011) as well as McCrae et al. (2005) research which revealed that extraversion is associated with a repudiation

~ 24 ~

of fatalism, a high subjective well-being as well as an orientation towards the self and the self-expression, it seems that in individualistic countries, the majority of the people are considered as being introverts whereas in collectivistic countries the majority of the people are possessing more extravert personality traits.

3.1.3. Statistical procedure

Data was collected by using and online survey provided by Qualtrics. The survey administration started on the 25th _{of April 2016. It was closed after 3 weeks, on the 20}th _{of May 2016. To perform}

the statistical analysis, the Statistical software Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) was used. There are 4 different hypotheses that must be tested in which introversion and extroversion are the independent variables.

H1: Introverts will post more frequently than extroverts. H1.1: Individualists will post more than collectivists.

H2: Introverts have more pictures with themselves whereas extraverts have mainly pictures with others such as family and friends.

H2.1: Individualists have more pictures with themselves whereas collectivists have mainly pictures with others.

H3: Introverts focus more on meeting new people and extraverts use it for keeping in touch with people.

H3.1: Individualists use Facebook mainly for networking and meeting new people whereas collectivists use it to network and to keep in touch with people.

H4: Introverts keep their profiles public whereas extraverts keep their profiles private.

H4.1: Individualists have their profile public whereas collectivists keep their profiles more private.

Firstly, in order to find out the reliability of the data, a Cronbach Alpha test was conducted on the 12 personality questions from the questionnaire. The questions had a 4 point Linkert scale, from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The “neither agree nor disagree” part was left out in order to encourage the respondents to identify with the statements. The result was .698, which is not a good output as an acceptable reliability level must have a Cronbach Alpha > .70. However, there were 2 questions out of 12 which were reversed in the test and they were specific for introverts. These questions had as a scope to test the reliability of the responses of the participants and test if they

~ 25 ~

are reading the questions carefully when answering them. In order to understand if all the questions in the personality test have a recode was made in which the scale (1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=agree, 4=strongly agree) was given new values in order to flip them around and make them extrovert questions. The result was significant – there was an improvement of .181, reaching a reliability Cronbach Alpha of .879 meaning that the data is reliable. After that, the average of extroversion needed to be found in order to divide the two groups. In order to do so, Descriptive Statistics was used. The output showed that the minimum average of extroversion is 1.50 and the maximum is 3.92. Based on this information, every value above 3 was considered as extrovert and every value below it as introvert. This was coded in the following way: the values from 0 until 2.92 were considered as introversion and given the value “0” and the values from 3 until 4 were considered extroversion and given the value “1”. The new variable “Average_extroversion” contained these values.

The cultures were divided in two separate groups based on the cultural dimensions of Hofstede of “individualism/collectivism”.

There were, on the one side the individualistic – introverted countries: USA, Canada, Netherlands, Italy, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Austria, France, Switzerland, Spain, Hungary, UK, Iceland. On the other side there were the collectivism – extroverted countries: Romania, India, Greece, Thailand, Hong Kong, Turkey, Mexico, Slovenia, Indonesia, Dominican Republic, Bulgaria. The division was made in this way as a way to help the sub-hypotheses 1.1.,2.1, 3.1 and 4.1 to find out if culture acts as a moderator between the personality of an individual and the 4 dependent variables. A new variable was created, “Country_moderation”, with the value 3 for individualistic countries and the value 4 for collectivistic countries.

3.2. Interviews

The interviews formed the core of the research. Data from the survey findings was used in order to structure some of the questions. Emphasis was more on the questions that did not have sufficient evidence from the survey to be validated – the one about the privacy of the account and the one regarding the usage of Facebook for networking. The aim of the interviews was to get deeper into the issue at hand and discover what makes a good personal brand on Facebook and which the tools that individuals can use are in order to manage their profiles in such a way that puts them in a good light and helps them form a good first online impression.

~ 26 ~

There were a total of 12 interviews conducted on a time frame of 2 weeks. 10 interviewees were students, with ages between 20 and 32 years old. Some of them were respondents from the survey and some were approached via social media platforms and asked if they wish to participate in a study.

One of the two interviewees was a recruiter who uses Facebook to sort out candidates based on their personality and image created online and another one who used to do so in the past. These individuals were interviewed in order to have a professional opinion on how an individual is portraying him/herself online and to gain more insight on how people should manage their online profiles without hurting their offline careers.

The interviewees were from different countries. Moreover, the profiles collected from the survey were used in this stage in order to ask the opinion of the students and the recruiters on how those individuals are branding themselves online and to see if they can see a difference between the introverts and extraverts.

The interviews were semi-structured, with 20 questions as a starting point for the discussion as well as guidance during the interview and they lasted from 30 minutes up to one hour. The questions aimed at finding out more about the previous variables which were tested in the surveys and to come up with a common framework which would work across countries, despite of one’s personality as well as to see how individuals perceive Facebook and its usage.

3.2.2. Variables

In the interviews, the same variables as in the survey were used. Interviewees had a different cultural background. This part was important because the research aimed at discovering if, based on the culture, individuals have different opinions and usage for Facebook. Moreover, culture played an important role as well in finding how an individual is portraying himself/herself online and if there are different cultural perspectives on how to create a good and positive online personal brand.

~ 27 ~

First, a brief summary of the interview was conducted after each one in order to find new keywords, emerging topics or to check whether respondents agreed with some statements with which the previous interviewees did. The interviews were recorded, listen to, transcribed and then used to check for all the things mentioned before. This also helped the researcher to gain more and more insights into the problem and to add more questions to the main structure of the interview. With every interview, more issues were discovered and analyzed. In the last stage, the interviews were transcribed and sent to the interviewees for checks and further improvements. In this way, the risks of errors and misunderstandings were mostly reduced.

Once the transcripts were ready and approved by the interviewees, a more comprehensive approach of the analysis system was adopted. In order to conduct an efficient comparative analysis among the interviewees from different countries, the transcriptions were analyzed using a software for qualitative data analyses called “NVivo”. Here, a combination of inductive and deductive approaches was used, with “selective codes” from the academic literature on usage of Facebook, account privacy, Facebook branding and later additions of new categories which emerged during the interviews. This type of coding technique allowed the researcher to observe similarities among the responses of the interviewees, as well as to find recurrent themes and patterns and form an overall opinion on the perspective of individuals regarding the issue at hand. The data analysis process specifically aimed to clarify and provide understanding on what personal branding is in the online social media platforms, how one individual can benefit from this and whether or not a personal profile can make or break you offline career.

The study is limited to few individuals and only 2 recruiters. However, it provides useful insights in the problem as well as some ideas for future research in the online personal branding problem.

~ 28 ~

4. Research findings

This chapter presents the main findings of the data analysis. As stated in Chapter 3, the research is a combination of one survey and 12 interviews. In the first part of the research, the survey contained questions regarding the activity on Facebook as well as questions to determine the personality of the individual (i.e. introvert/extravert). In the second part of the research, 12 semi-structured interviews were conducted, 10 participants were students and the other two interviewees use Facebook in order to recruit people for their company. The survey findings were used more as a starting point for the research and the interviews gather some more insight in how people perceive Facebook as personal branding platform as well as their activity on it.

4.1. Survey findings

Testing H1: It was found that extroverts are more likely to post on Facebook once a week (21) whereas introverts were found to post less (8). Moreover, when looking at not posting at all, introverts had a significant highly number (9) than extroverts (3). For monthly posts, there wasn’t a significant difference between the 2 groups.

Furthermore, the Cramer’s V value was .325, meaning that there is a strong relationship between the personality of an individual and how often he/she posts on Facebook. To test this even further, a Logistical regression was conducted, in which “once a week” and “monthly” were compared with “never”.

~ 29 ~

“Once a week” was found to be relevant because both values of the upper and lower bound were both below 1. Moreover, the odds of posting “once a week” than “never” when being an extrovert is 7.87 (1/.127) higher than when being an introvert. This finding was not in line with the initial hypothesis – it was found that extroverts, at least for “once per week”, post more than introverts. This might be due to the fact that introverts, even though they might use Facebook for networking, prefer to use other means of creating those connections.

Therefore, the first hypothesis (H1) was rejected. The data showed that, on average, extraverts are more likely to post on Facebook than introverts. The significant difference between the 2 groups was when posting “once per week” – 21 Vs 8. This significant difference might be because extroverts want to keep people updated with their lives whereas introverts might use different tools from Facebook to keep in touch and create new connections. Moreover, when compared with “never” in the Logistical Analysis, there wasn’t sufficient data for “monthly” posts. However, for “once per week”, the hypothesis was once again supported - extroverts were found to post “once per week” on average 7.87 times more than introverts.

When testing to see whether or not culture can be a moderator of the relationship Multinomial Regression was used. After the analysis was conducted, culture was found to not influence the relationship between the independent and the dependent variable. Therefore, it is safe to say that no matter the country of origin, extraverts and introverts possess the same traits and use Facebook as a way of interaction in the same way.

~ 30 ~

Testing H2: When conducting the Crosstabs for “pictures with others” (H2), on the one hand, more introverts disagreed with the statement than extroverts. On the other hand, there was a significant difference between the extroverts who agreed with the statement and introverts (39 Vs. 26) meaning that extroverts prefer mostly to post pictures with others.

This may be due to the fact that extroverts like being surrounded by people and prefer to share online the nice moments with loved ones. Introverts might prefer to post a simple picture with themselves or something else as they enjoy more being by themselves and not surrounded by people all the time. In this case, Facebook can be seen more as a personal thing for introverts, a platform where they keep their identity and full express themselves.

The hypothesis was found to be valid as the value is below .05.

The value of the Cramer’s V is .261 meaning that there is a moderate relationship between the 2 variables (the personality and the type of pictures posted).

The personality was found to be influential. However, culture was not found to moderate the relationship between the two variables.

There was not enough evidence to test the differences between the introverts and extroverts and the amount of selfies they are posting.

~ 31 ~

Therefore, one can only assume that, taking into consideration the first part of the analysis, extroverts like to post more pictures with other people whereas introverts prefer to post pictures with themselves or with a landscape. However, it is still unclear whether introverts would post selfies of themselves or not. A variable which might play an important role here is the level of self-esteem an introvert or an extravert might have. This possibility can be up to further discussion and research.

Testing H3: In order to test H3, firstly, a Crosstabs was conducted for the variable “keeping in touch with family and friends”.

When asked if they use Facebook for keeping in touch with their friends and family, the majority of respondents of both groups agreed with the statement, with extroverts having 8 points more than introverts. There weren’t any significant differences between the two groups of participants who disagreed with the statement.

The value of the Cramer’s V was found to be .363, meaning that there is a strong relationship between the personality of the individual and the usage of Facebook for keeping in touch.

However, there wasn’t enough evidence to support the hypothesis (must be below .05 to be valid). Furthermore, a Multinomial Logistical regression was conducted to see if the culture of the personalities acted as a moderator between the 2 variables. In this case, culture was not found to influence the relationship between the two variables.

Secondly, a Crosstabs for “networking” usage was conducted to see whether or not there is a significant difference as well as a strong relationship between the 2 variables.

There were not significant differences between the introverts and extroverts who agreed or disagreed with the statement. However, there wasn’t enough evidence to support the hypothesis. Also, culture was not found to be an influencer on the relationship between the two variables.

~ 32 ~

This lack of moderation factor might be also due to the fact that there was not enough evidence to support the hypothesis in the first place. These 2 variables will be further discussed and analyzed in the interviews.

Testing H4: For this hypothesis, the same process was repeated as in H3 – Crosstabs were conducted first and then a Multinominal Regression in order to find if culture influences the relationship between the personality of an individual and the privacy of the account.

Figure: Private profile – not enough evidence

Figure: Public profile – not enough evidence

Unfortunately, there wasn’t enough evidence found to support this hypothesis and culture was not found to act as a moderator between the two variables. Therefore, this hypothesis will be further tested in the interviews.

~ 33 ~

As an overall conclusion, 2 hypotheses could not be validated (H3 and H4). H1 was rejected – extroverts were found to post more frequently than introverts in a week when compared with not posting at all. This might be due to the fact that extroverts like to be more open and out-spoken and keep this personality on the social media platforms as well. Moreover, they do not think whether or not people will criticize their posts or pictures so they might tend to be more themselves online than introverts. H2 was supported – extroverts were found to post more pictures with others than introverts. Extraverts prefer to be surrounded by people thus the explanation of the preference towards group pictures.

This pre-test gave an overall idea of the usage of Facebook based on the personality of the individual. Moreover, 12 Facebook profiles were collected (people were asked to give their profiles voluntarily at the end of the survey for further research). These profiles, together with the insights from the results of the survey, will build up to the second part of the study which consists of in-depth interviews. The scope of these interviews is to dig deeper into the problem and understand how people perceive other individuals online and if there is a common framework which can be used in order to create a good personal brand on Facebook, a brand that can be appealing to the majority of the public.

Therefore, the question remains: “What makes a good personal brand on Facebook and to what extent is the personality and culture of origin of the individual influencing the way he/she creates the brand?”

~ 34 ~

4.2.1 Choice of usage for some particular social media platforms

During the interviews, the participants were first asked to state the online platforms which they mostly use and explain why those particular ones are of interest. All interviewees mentioned Facebook. They like this platform mostly it is easy to use and they see it as a really good channel to keep in touch with friends and family. Other platforms which were mentioned were Instagram and LinkedIn.

When the answers were coded based on sentiment in Nvivo, the majority of the respondents seem to have a neutral sentiment towards the Facebook platform (7) whereas 5 positive statements were made regarding it (i.e. “I use Facebook because it is really easy”) and only 2 negative ones (i.e. “Facebook because of work but actually I wanted to quit my personal profile”). Suffice it to say, people have their Facebook profile for a while now and it seems that even though if they want to go anonymous on this platform, they cannot do so because it connects them with other people, events, even looking for jobs or apartments. As suspected, Facebook occupies a big part in the daily life of an individual even though they do not post, they do not create content, they do consume it.

Instagram was the second most mentioned social media platform used. There were no negative statements about it, mainly neutral (6) and positive (5) with statements such as: “I use Instagram from time to time to post more beautiful pictures”, “I love Instagram, mostly because it is pictures and you can do whatever you want with them”. This is an interesting twist, as Instagram is still in the beginning and you can only upload pictures. However, some of the respondents stated that they prefer to upload pictures than text because they feel that they can express themselves more by using visuals.

The third online platform mentioned was LinkedIn and respondents seems to view it more for their professional life and useful to make connections and get a job. There was not too much research conducted in this field so far.

It was interesting to see the fact that once respondents heard the word “professional branding” they immediately think of LinkedIn and when talking about “private” life, Facebook was the choice. These findings are in line with what Schau and Gilly (2003) discovered in their research – people use the social media platforms to meet new people, find solutions to different problems as well as for jobs.

~ 35 ~

4.2.2. Online platforms used for branding the self

When asked whether or not online platforms in general can be used to market yourself and your career, the majority of the respondents had neutral opinions (8) stating that in the end it all depends on the job for which you are applying for.

In their opinion, recruiters look at LinkedIn for professional insights in most of the cases and this is the online profile that an individual must take care of if he/she wants to get a good job (i.e. “I do not use LinkedIn but I know that I should start”, “Especially for your career I think LinkedIn is really good”).

The Facebook profile of the individual, in the interviewees opinion, is important only if the company recruits for a certain position based on personality and they need more information about how the person acts in the daily life as well as how (s)he interacts with those around him/her (i.e. “Entrepreneurs create an audience but they need to create an image, to sell themselves somehow so they can sell to others their products. In that case, it is useful to use these tools to advance your career”, “Obviously, models and actors and singers, for them it is easier than for a banker”). Recruiters also admitted to look at both profiles when screening for candidates – “When I was recruiting I was looking at people’s Facebook, LinkedIn, seeing their profile picture type, how many connections they have so I think it is an image of you professionally and personally.”

4.2.3. Choice of Facebook usage

The most frequent words which occurred when interviewees were asked why they use Facebook were: use, post, see, pictures, friends, post, articles, share and every day. When conducting a sentiment analysis in Nvivo, the statements were mainly neutral (5) and referring more to the keeping in touch feature of the platform and positive (3). Examples of such statements: “I use it pretty much every day, mainly as a source of communication.”, “I go on Facebook every 5 minutes to see if there is a new piece of information published”. From the responses, it seems that people use Facebook on a daily basis to keep up with the latest news and to catch up with friends but not so much to post things.

When asked about the posting rate, the majority stated that they barely post. If they travel or stumble upon an interesting article or a nice song, they might post it. Otherwise, they prefer to keep a certain level of neutrality. Moreover, when posting, the interviewees mainly prefer to post pictures over text because they feel that it gives them more liberty to express themselves.