The different motivations and self-disclosure tendencies that
emerging adults have for using Whatsapp and communicating
face-to-face and the use of the two media for social capital aims.
Name: Daniël Koster
Student number: 606 44 69
Master thesis
Youth and Media
Graduate School of Communication
University of Amsterdam
Supervisor: Mw. Dr. M. Timmers
Date: 26 July, 2015
1
Abstract
Emerging adults communicate with each other face-to-face, but also via other means such as WhatsApp. The question however arises what the differences are between communicating face-to-face or by the means of WhatsApp. The current study investigates this by looking at the motivations for choosing one of the two media, the characteristics of face-to-face
conversations and WhatsApp, the differences between self-disclosure online and face-to-face, and social capital. This was studied by undertaking two surveys amongst emerging adults aged 18 to 28 years old. The results indicate that no difference is found between the
preference for face-to-face communication or WhatsApp regarding the characteristics of the specific medium. The same goes for self-disclosure. Face-to-face communication is preferred for building social capital, certain motivations and is used significantly more than WhatsApp. WhatsApp was found to be more popular for emerging adults for disclosing information online. The current study found it hard to find previous research on WhatsApp and this is the main contribution of the current study to earlier research. However, more research on
WhatsApp is needed as the results of this study implicate that WhatsApp is different from other online media in relation to its use amongst emerging adults.
1. Introduction
The internet plays an increasingly growing role in the life of emerging adults
(Subrahmanyam, Reich, Waechter & Espinoza, 2008). One of the reasons that the internet has a great impact on the life of emerging adults can be acquitted to their social life. Friends and social relationships are an important aspect of emerging adults’ life (Kalmijn, 2003). The alternatives of speaking to each other were slim before the internet. Apart from
communicating face-to-face, one did not have many options. With the emergence and rise of the internet, numerous new alternatives have come into existence which supported the
2
forming and maintaining of social relationships without having to meet each other in person. One of these alternatives is WhatsApp.
WhatsApp is a cross-platform instant messaging application which can be used singularly on your smartphone (Church and De Oliveira, 2013). WhatsApp is made for the sole purpose of communicating with each other and enables the users to send and receive texts, pictures, videos, audio messages and locations. This can be done between two
individuals but also in groups up to one hundred people. In April 2015, the CEO of WhatsApp announced that 800 million people were now using WhatsApp (“What’s up with
WhatsApp’s”, 2015). This is more than ten percent of the world population. Furthermore, another online article shows that, in percentages, emerging adults are the greatest users of WhatsApp (“Cijfers WhatsApp-gebruik in Nederland”, 2014). The articles however fail to state why emerging adults communicate by the means of WhatsApp.
Many reasons can be found and one is the building of social capital. Social capital includes the benefits that one accrues from having social relationships with other people in the form of virtual- or actual resources (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992). The building of social capital happens through the creation and maintenance of social relationships (Williams, 2007). There has been quite some recent research on how the internet can stimulate social relationships in the form of social capital. Although recent studies have focused on the forming of social capital online, social capital can also be formed offline in the form of face-to-face interactions. Simply put, emerging adults do not only communicate face-face-to-face or by the use of WhatsApp, they do both. This study wishes to further investigate in which
situations people tend to communicate more by the use of WhatsApp, and in which situations emerging adults tend to communicate more face-to-face. The current study will investigate this by looking at the different reasons and motivations for communicating face-to-face or by the use of WhatsApp in a given situation in the form of three concepts.
3
The first concept is the motivations that emerging adults have for communicating on WhatsApp or face-to-face. This concept is closely related to the second concept, the
characteristics of WhatsApp and face-to-face communication. Characteristics are related to the motivations because certain characteristics stimulate people to choose for one of the two media. WhatsApp is asynchronous, accessible and lacks non-verbal cues (Peter &
Valkenburg, 2011; Atheunis, Valkenburg, Schouten & Peter, 2012). Face-to-face
conversations carry nonverbal cues, provide rapid feedback, convey personality traits, and support the use of natural language (Watters, 1992). The different characteristics of WhatsApp and face-to-face communication and the different motivations one has for
communicating via WhatsApp or face-to-face can influence if someone tends to communicate face-to-face or via WhatsApp in a given situation.
The third and final concept is self-disclosure. Self-disclosure relates to the disclosing of information about ones’ self (Cozby, 1973). One can disclose information on WhatsApp or in face-to-face conversations. This study wishes to investigate the relationship between an individual’s tendency for disclosing information online and offline and the use of WhatsApp or face-to-face.
Social capital, motivations, self-disclosure and the characteristics of WhatsApp and face-to-face communication will be studied by undertaking two different surveys, one on WhatsApp use and one on face-to-face communication. These two surveys enable the researcher to study the differences between the concepts named above for WhatsApp and face-to-face communication. This study wishes to answer the following main research
question with the data generated through the surveys: “What are the differences regarding the motivations, the characteristics, self-disclosure online and offline and social capital for emerging adults with respect to communicating face-to-face or via WhatsApp?”
4
By studying this research question, this study wishes to fill a number of knowledge gaps. Firstly, WhatsApp is a fairly new and largely used web-based application which has not been studied a lot to the knowledge of the author. However, due to its characteristics it is safe to say that WhatsApp is different from other online media. This could mean that the
relationship between WhatsApp and online self-disclosure, the motivations for using
WhatsApp and social capital may be different from face-to-face communication. The current study wishes to add knowledge on the matter by investigating how the just named concepts are related to the inclination for communicating face-to-face or via WhatsApp. Furthermore, a literature analysis was undertaken in the theory section of the current study. However, the conclusions (which can be found in the theory section of the current study) from these studies sometimes contradict each other. With the results of the current study more information is provided in order to shed more light on the dynamics of the (contradicting) conclusions. Lastly, all these matters have not been studied extensively for emerging adults.
The conclusions that this study provides will also be important for practical reasons. As the two articles in the introduction showed, WhatsApp is very popular amongst emerging adults and the global population as a whole. A better scientific understanding of WhatsApp can provide emerging adults with a framework for how they can use WhatsApp for practical aims, such as the building and maintaining of social relationships. This also gives for face-to-face communication, as the same concepts are studied for both WhatsApp and face-to-face-to-face-to-face conversations. Furthermore, the results of the current study will not only enable emerging adults to make understand how they can use the two media, but also help them make a well-considered choice between the different forms of communication. The results give emerging adults a scientific foundation on which they can base their decision for using one of the two media for a specific goal, such as creating social capital.
5
2. Theory
2.1 Uses and gratificationsThe uses and gratifications theory is a theoretical approach that can be used to clarify the reasons for emerging adults to either communicate face-to-face or by the use of WhatsApp. De Boer and Brennecke (2003) state that the uses and gratifications theory posits that a person actively seeks what medium to use in order to satisfy a need. The central characteristics of the theory are that a person is active in searching for a medium to satisfy a goal and that different kinds of media compete with each other in order to accomplish this goal. As Lampe, Wash, Velasquez and Ozkaya (2010, pp. 1927) very accurately state, the theory ‘helps explain what motivates individual users to consume media based on their own anticipation of what they will receive by doing so.’ In line with the uses and gratifications theory, the motivations that a person has for initiating communication for a certain goal in a certain situation will lead to the choice for either face-to-face contact or contact through WhatsApp. These motivations can be very diverse. Earlier studies have tried to pinpoint these motivations. The motivations that these studies found are all on the use of the internet, not specifically for WhatsApp. The reason that these motivations can be generalized and applied to the use of WhatsApp is that these basic motivations for media use have not dramatically changed due to the emergence of new technologies (Flanagin and Metzger, 2001). This study will investigate the overlaying dimensions regarding the motivations a person can have for using WhatsApp or
communicating face-to-face. These overlaying dimensions are interesting for the current study because they give a generalization of different motivations.
Seven studies have been found and analyzed regarding the motivations to use the internet. The dimensions that these studies have found are interpersonal utility (help others, give my input etc), information, entertainment, pass time and convenience (easier), self-discovery, personal relevance, transactional security and privacy, interactive control,
6
nontransactional privacy, economic motivation and guidance (Rubin & Papacharissi, 2000; Lampe et al., 2010; Eighmey, 1997; Korgaonkar & Wolin, 1999; Kaye & Johnson, 2004; Barker, 2009; Cho, 2007). A couple of dimensions were prominently found in the just named studies. These are the dimensions of entertainment, information (seeking and providing), convenience, pass time and social (socialization, social escapism, social utility, and (maintaining) personal relations). For that reason, this study will incorporate these five
dimensions as the most important general motivations for using the internet and will use these five dimensions to clarify the reasons for individuals in using WhatsApp. Because these are general dimensions for communication these motivations for using WhatsApp can also be applicable in explaining why emerging adults are motivated to communicate face-to-face. This has however not been studied to the knowledge of the author and will be investigated in this study.
RQ1: Which motivations influence the choice for communicating face-to-face or via WhatsApp?
2.2 Uses and gratifications and media richness
Until now this paper has focused on motivations as a way to interpret the uses and
gratifications theory. There is another concept which can be seen as a part of the uses and gratifications. These are the characteristics of WhatsApp and face-to-face. These are different from one another and influence the choice for communicating face-to-face or by the use of WhatsApp in a given situation. The media richness explains the differences between different media by providing a theoretical framework focusing on how ’rich’ a communication medium is, or how much of the texture and depth of typical face-to-face conversation it incorporates. Less rich, or ‘lean(er)’ media (such as e-mail, discussion boards, or chats) lack (some of) the
7
characteristics of face-to-face communication and may lead to increased communication difficulties. This classification of media is based on its ability to carry nonverbal cues, provide rapid feedback, convey personality traits, and support the use of natural language (Watters, 1992).
Regarding media richness, face-to-face communication is the richest medium. This is due to the fact that face-to-face includes nonverbal cues, immediate feedback, conveys personality traits and supports the use of natural language. The richer-get-richer hypothesis can help predict what the relationship is between the richness of face-to-face communication and the choice for that particular medium in a given situation. The hypothesis posits that individuals who are already comfortable in face-to-face communication situations will also benefit from communicating via WhatsApp (Desjarlais & Willoughby, 2010). This implicitly states that an individual will not mind how to communicate if they are comfortable in face-to-face conversations. As the media richness theory states that one will choose the best medium for a given situation and face is the richest, these emerging adults will turn to face-to-face communication given the choice. This does seem the case, as WhatsApp has not taken over the traditional way of communicating face-to-face, rather complemented it (Walther, 1992).
The characteristics of WhatsApp are very much alike computer mediated
communication characteristics. WhatsApp is also an internet based application which enables emerging adults to send and receive messages online. WhatsApp can be seen as leaner due to these characteristics, which can best be explained with the concepts used by Valkenburg and Peter (2011). They state that computer mediated communication consists of three important characteristics. These characteristics are asynchrocinity, anonymity and accessibility. As this study focusses on WhatsApp and the sender and receiver are not anonymous, only
8
sender to change and reflect on the message that he/she wants to send, and for the sender to take his/her time in doing so. This stands in great contrast with face-to-face communication, where communication is continuous and immediate response is expected. For this reason, especially emerging adults who are in any way unsure of themselves tend to like the increased feeling of controllability they have with computer mediated communication. Accessibility refers to the fact that through computer mediated communication it is easier for people to stay in contact with other people that they haven’t seen for a long time or are difficult to meet in person. It can be quite difficult for emerging adults to initiate contact after not seeing each other for a long time, this can feel somewhat awkward. This barrier is less profound with computer mediated communication. There is another characteristic of WhatsApp important to recognize, namely the lack of nonverbal cues (Antheunis, Valkenburg, Schouten & Peter, 2012). WhatsApp lacks nonverbal cues as it is not possible to see the person that one is communicating with. The only thing someone sees is text, emoticons and sometimes pictures and video’s. The social compensation hypothesis can help predict what the relationship is between the characteristics of WhatsApp and the choice for that specific medium in a given situation. The hypothesis posits that people who have difficulty communicating face-to-face due to them being socially anxious, will utilize WhatsApp in order to fulfill their
communicational needs (Desjarlais & Willoughby, 2010). In line with this hypothesis, emerging adults that are for example socially anxious or insecure and find it hard to communicate face-to-face will turn to WhatsApp and minimalize face-to-face communication.
Based on the two hypotheses it is hard to predict what the relationship will be between the characteristics of WhatsApp and face-to-face communication and the choice to use one of the two media more for emerging adults. This is why the current study wishes to investigate if
9
a person actively chooses to communicate more face-to-face or more by the means of WhatsApp due to the characteristics of the medium, or if this is not the case.
RQ2: What characteristics of face-to-face communication and WhatsApp influence the choice for using one of the two media?
2.3 Self-disclosure
There is another important trait that may explain the choice for communicating face-to-face or via WhatsApp, which is self-disclosure. The relationship between self-disclosure and
communicating more face-to-face or online has been studied a lot. Self-disclosure is the disclosing of intimate information about ones’ self (Cozby, 1973).
Emerging adults can have higher or lower needs for self-disclosure and with the emergence of the internet emerging adults have the opportunity to practice this need face-to-face or online. Online disclosure measures do not focus at self-disclosure per se, but more if individuals prefer to disclose information online. As this study investigates differences between WhatsApp use and face-to-face communication, it is important to find out if
emerging adults rather disclose information online or face-to face. It is also important to find out how this relates to the characteristics of WhatsApp and face-to-face communication, and the motivations for using WhatsApp or communicating face-to-face. This is important because it will give us insight in the reasons for emerging adults to use WhatsApp or communicate with others face-to-face in certain situations.
Bryant, Sanders and Smallwood (2006) state that individuals still tend to have in-depth conversations face-to-face. In line with this statement, this should lead to emerging adults disclosing personal information about ones’ self more face-to-face. Schouten, Peter and Valkenburg (2007) found that self-disclosure happens less online than face-to-face. The
10
problem however is that other studies have found results indicating that individuals disclose intimate information more online, and more often online (Antheunis, Schouten, Valkenburg & Peter, 2012; Wang, Jackson & Zang, 2011).
A number of factors have been identified that can lead to self-disclosing on WhatsApp rather than self-disclosing face-to-face. Valkenburg and Peter (2009) found that adolescents (who are a bit younger than emerging adults) have a higher need for self-disclosure. However, face-to-face disclosure is bound to the location that you are in, as it is hard to speak to
someone physically who lives further away. Reasons such as emerging adults moving away from home and friends to another city for work or study can lead to the same result. Also, emerging adults can be social anxious, shy and self-conscious. Because of the distance-restraint being solved with WhatsApp, and WhatsApp being less direct due to its characteristics named earlier, emerging adults could turn to this medium.
Based upon the literature, it is hard to say if higher self-disclosure levels will lead to more use of WhatsApp, to more face-to-face conversations or have no relationship of the kind. Furthermore, the characteristics of WhatsApp, such as being less direct and lacking nonverbal cues, could be positive for emerging adults who want to disclose information about themselves but are socially anxious. For these reasons, this study will investigate the
differences between self-disclosure for WhatsApp conversations and speaking to each other face-to-face. Also, the current study will investigate the relationship between self-disclosure and the motivations for- and the characteristics of WhatsApp and face-to-face
communications.
RQ3: What is the relationship between the characteristics of WhatsApp, the use of WhatsApp, the motivations to use WhatsApp and online self-disclosure?
11
RQ4: What is the relationship between the motivations of face-to-face communication, the characteristics of face-to-face communication, the amount of face-to-face communication and self-disclosure?
RQ5: What is the difference between disclosing information about ones’ self on WhatsApp and in face-to-face conversations?
2.4 Social capital
Williams (2006) explains that the things which are used and created with social capital are personal relationships and the benefits that come with them. These benefits are traditionally voiced with the explanation of bridging- and bonding social capital (Putnam, 2000). Bridging social capital relates to the relationships with weak ties, such as people you have only met once or twice or do not even know in person but only through the internet. These relationships often lead to novel information, as you often get to know new things when you converse with people whom you do not know very well. Bridging social capital is very different from bonding social capital. This relates to the relationships between strong ties. Strong ties are people such as family and good friends. These relationships acquire benefits in the form of social support.
Bridging- and bonding social capital occurs in face-to-face communications (Putnam, 2000) and originated in offline contexts (Choi et al., 2010). Emerging adults meet friends and family (strong ties) and also meet new people or people they do not know very well in person (weak ties). Bryant et al. (2006) state that in relation to online communications, more bonding social capital should occur in face-to-face conversations. This is because in depth important conversations are more often held face-to-face than online.
12
With the emergence of the internet social capital can also be formed online. There has been quite some research in relation to the use of online contexts for creating bridging- and bonding social capital. Regarding online contexts, a consensus can be found on bridging social capital. Studies have shown that there is a positive relationship between the use of the internet and the establishment of bridging social capital (Ellison, Seinfeld & Lampe, 2007; Williams, 2007; Ledbetter et al., 2011; Choi, Kim, Sung & Sohn, 2010). Studies have also shown that online context can lead to bonding social capital (Ellison, Seinfeld & Lampe, 2007; Donath & Boyd, 2004). Contradicting results have been found however. Were one study for example found that people form strong ties and bonding social capital (Williams, 2006), another found that internet usage was associated with a decrease in bonding social capital, so less strong ties (Williams, 2007).
WhatsApp is however different from the social media sites that the previously named studies have investigated regarding social capital. This as WhatsApp is not anonymous and more private than other social networking sites. You need one another’s number to
communicate with each other and no one else can see your conversations with other people. This may lead to bridging social capital, which is formed of weak ties, being less prone in WhatsApp conversations. Bonding social capital may have a more positive relationship with WhatsApp conversations though, as the threshold of anonymity is surpassed. This is in line with Kim, Kim, Park and Rice (2007). They state that mobile phones tend to be more used for reinforcing strong relationships, whilst other text based computer mediated communication tools are used for expanding relationships with weak ties.
It is clear that social capital is formed online and offline, although it is hard to find a consensus on how social capital is formed online and offline. An interesting observation posed by Williams (2006) is that a gain off social capital online may obscure a loss offline. This study wishes to investigate the occurrence of bridging- and bonding social capital on
13
WhatsApp and in face-to-face conversations. By comparing the two, the current study wishes to add knowledge to how the different media are used for creating social capital.
RQ 6: To what extend do WhatsApp and face-to-face conversations lead to a difference between bonding- and bridging social capital?
3. Method
3.1 Sample
The data that are analyzed in order to answer the research questions are obtained by the means of two different surveys amongst Dutch emerging adults aged 18 to 28 years old (Arnett, 2000). The sample was obtained by contacting emerging adults from the social network of the researcher. They were contacted through social media and WhatsApp by the researcher. Apart from the participants having to be aged between 18 and 28 years old, the survey regarding WhatsApp required another condition that had to be satisfied, namely that the participants had to have used WhatsApp at least once in the last week. The current study aimed to obtain eighty respondents in which it succeeded (M = 23,50, SD = 2,18). From the eighty respondents, 46 were male (57,50%) and 34 were female (42,50%). About 150 emerging adults were contacted and eighty of them filled out the survey, which is a response rate of 53%. The participants in the study were motivated to fill out the surveys by use of social pressure from the researcher and the ability to be informed about the interesting results generated by this study. The participants did not receive any other form of extrinsic motivation for filling out the survey.
14
3.2 Survey
Two surveys were undertaken to investigate the research questions. One survey was based upon WhatsApp, and one survey was based upon face-to-face communication. The author created two groups of respondents and sent them one of the two versions of the survey. Both surveys consisted of the same questions on WhatsApp or face-to-face communication, although differed slightly in their phrasings in order to suit the communication medium. The surveys investigated seven different measures and were distributed online to the participants. First, demographic information was asked. This included age and gender. Then the seven variables were measured, which will be explained further on. In chronological order, the average daily use of the communication measure was asked. Then the motivations for- and characteristics of the communication medium was measured. Furthermore, self-disclosure was measured (online and offline). Finally bridging and bonding social capital were measured.
3.3 Design
The two versions of the survey were distributed online to the participants in week 22, 2015. The surveys were cross-sectional surveys. The reason for the surveys to contain the same items was for the benefit of the analysis of the data. The current study wishes to investigate the similarities and differences on the variables named above. By using the same items, these similarities and differences can be analyzed. Every participant in this study was above eighteen years old, so no form of consent was needed from parents. The study was presented to a reviewer of the University of Amsterdam in order to ensure that the questionnaire was ethically just. Also, the anonymity of the information given by the participants was
15
3.4 Measures
As named above apart from measuring demographic information seven variables were measured. The conceptual model of these seven variables can be found in Figure 1.
Motivations. The analysis of the literature showed that five dimensions are frequently
found regarding motivations for using the internet. These five dimensions were entertainment, information, convenience, pass time and social. In order to measure these five dimensions, five items were used. The different items measuring a kind of motivation can be found in appendix A. An example of an item is “I use WhatsApp to pass time.” The responding options ranged from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). The motivations which were found for the use of the internet are also used as motivations for engaging in faced-to-face
conversations. This entails that same items were used to measure the different motivations for face-to-face contact, although they are changed slightly to fit this type of communication. The items were not computed into one scale, as the items measure different motivations. Taken together they do not measure one thing, such as one general motivation.
Characteristics of WhatsApp and face-to-face communication: Based on the theory
such as asynchrocinity and accessibility (Valkenburg & Peter, 2011), there are certain characteristics which set WhatsApp and face-to-face conversations aside from one another. These were four characteristics for WhatsApp and four for face-to-face communication. Therefore, both questionnaires incorporated eight items. The four items on WhatsApp were not very reliable (α=0,65), but this improved after deleting the last item, which is the item regarding the lack of nonverbal cues (α=0,74). Because the reliability improved quite
drastically, this item was deleted. This left a scale composed of three items. An example of an item is “I like to use WhatsApp because I do not have to react on messages instantly.” The other four items measured the characteristics of face-to-face communication. This scale was very reliable (α=0,95). An example of an item is “I like to talk to others face-to-face as it is
16
the most natural way of communicating.” All the items were answered on a 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). As said, both
questionnaires incorporated the same eight items. The face-to-face characteristic-items were only slightly altered to fit the WhatsApp questionnaire and vice-versa. This enabled the researcher to study if the respondents truly differentiated these characteristics, or did not consciously consider them. The characteristics (of face-to-face communication or WhatsApp) were then created in SPSS by computing a new variable which gave a mean score on the scale for the characteristics for that specific medium. A high score on this scale entailed that the characteristics for the given medium where more important for a respondent for choosing that means of communication. All the items can be found in appendix A.
Self-disclosure. Cozby (1973) names a sixty-item scale by Jourard. This scale contains
items on six themes, namely attitudes and opinions, tastes and interests, work (or studies), money, personality and body. The current study incorporated one item for each of the six themes. The self-disclosure scale’s reliability was sufficient (α=0,68). This leads to a six-item scale which can be found in appendix A. The participants were asked to indicate if they had disclosed information regarding the six items over the last week. They indicated this on a scale ranging from never disclosing any information (1) to disclosing information very often (7). These could be answered on a 7-point Likert-type scale. An example of an item is “I talked face-to-face about my feelings, such as being down or worried.” The self-disclosure scale was then computed in SPSS which gave a mean score on the scale for self-disclosure. A high score on this scale represented that a person discloses more information about ones’ self than a lower score represented. The same items and computed scale were also used for the WhatsApp version of the survey. However, they were altered slightly as face-to-face was changed into WhatsApp.
17
Online self-disclosure. Online self-disclosure was measured with four items which are
used in the study by Ledbetter et al. (2011). The online self-disclosure scale was of a strong reliability (α=0,89) and could be answered on a 7-point Likert-type scale. All the items can be found in appendix A. An example of an item is “I am less shy when communicating with people on WhatsApp.” The responding options ranged from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). The online self-disclosure scale was then created in SPSS which gave a mean score on the scale for online self-disclosure. A high score on this scale represented that a person discloses more information about ones’ self online than a lower score represented. In order to see the relationship between face-to-face communication and WhatsApp conversations, the same questions were also incorporated in the face-to-face survey, again with small
adjustments.
WhatsApp use and face-to-face communication. Based upon the Facebook intensity
scale from Ellison, Seinfield and Lampe (2007), participants were asked to indicate their average WhatsApp use or face-to-face conversations over the last week. This was measured with one item asking how many minutes were on average spent per day on WhatsApp or communicating face-to-face (1=less than 10, 2=10-30, 3=31-50 4=51-100, 5=100-150, 6=151-200, 7=201-250, 8=251-300, 9=301-400 and 10=more than 400). The reason for not taking a smaller period is that weekend days are very different than weekdays and those have to be accounted for. The reason for not taking a longer period is that this could lead to
memory biases. It is harder to remember your use of WhatsApp or talking to someone face-to-face over time.
Bonding social capital. For the measuring of online bonding social capital, seven
items were used. These items are based upon items used by Williams (2006) and Choi et al. (2011) and can be found in Appendix A. These seven items were of good reliability (α=0,90). An example of one of the items is “There are contacts on WhatsApp which I trust to help me
18
solve personal problems.” The responding options ranged from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). The bonding social capital scale was then created in SPSS which gave a mean score on the scale for bonding social capital. A high score on this scale represented that a person uses that certain media more for bonding social capital than a lower score
represented. The previously given item is an example of an item for the WhatsApp version of the survey. The same items were used for the face-to-face communication survey, although altered slightly to fit the communication version of the survey.
Bridging social capital. Online bridging social capital was measured by the use of five
items. These items were also based upon the research from Williams (2006) and Choi et al. (2011) and are listed in Appendix A. These five items had a good reliability (α=0,87). An example of an item is “When using WhatsApp I often come in contact with new people.” The responding options ranged from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). The same items were also used to measure face-to-face bridging social capital. The items were altered slightly in order to fit the type of communication. The bridging social capital scale was then created in SPSS giving a mean score on the scale for bridging social capital. A high score on this scale represented that a person uses that certain media more for bridging social capital than a lower score represented.
19
4. Results
The first set of results this paper will present, are the results of the independent sample t-test. The significant outcomes of the independent sample t-test will be able to shed more light on the differences between WhatsApp and face-to-face communication regarding the different variables. These are the motivations for the use of WhatsApp and face-to-face
communication, the characteristics of WhatsApp and face-to-face communication, self-disclosure online and face-to-face and bonding- and bridging social capital. Furthermore, this paper proposed that self-disclosure can influence the choice for communicating through WhatsApp or face-to-face, but may also influence the other, just named variables. For this reason, the results section will conclude with a regression analysis between self-disclosure online and face-to-face and the other variables, except for social capital.
4.1 The differences between communicating face-to-face or via WhatsApp
An independent sample t-test was used to analyze the differences between the two different surveys. First, the motivations for using face-to-face communication and WhatsApp were compared.
Motivations. Three significant results were found for the motivations one can have for
communicating face-to-face or by the use of WhatsApp. These can be found in Table 1. Firstly, the results indicate that entertainment purposes are significantly higher (M = 5,78, SD = 0,86) for face to face communication than for WhatsApp conversations (M = 3,90, SD = 1,32), t (78) =-7,54, p = 0,010, 99% CI [-2,38, -1.38]. This means that emerging adults are more motivated to communicate face-to-face for entertaining purposes.
Secondly, the data indicates that the finding and sharing of information is significantly higher (M = 5,05, SD = 1,30) for face to face communication than for WhatsApp
20
result shows that emerging adults are more motivated to communicate face-to-face for the finding and sharing of information than with WhatsApp.
The last significant result is found for an easy way of communicating, which is higher (M = 6,10, SD = 0,98) for WhatsApp conversations than for face-to-face conversations (M = 5,38, SD = 1,46), t (78) = 2,60, p = 0,002, 95% CI [0,17, 1,28]. This significant finding indicates that regarding the easiest way of communicating, on overall emerging adults will turn to WhatsApp conversations over face-to-face conversations.
For the motivation to pass time there was no significant difference between WhatsApp (M = 3,23, SD = 1,66) and face-to-face conversations (M = 2,93, SD = 1,58), t (78) = 0,83, P = 0,549, not significant CI [-0,42, 1,10]. The same can be said for social purposes were no significant result was found between WhatsApp (M = 5,95, SD = 1,04) and face-to-face conversations (M = 6,03, SD = 0,92), t (78) = -0,34 p = 0,548, not significant CI [-0,51, 0,36]. This indicates that these two motivations do not differ significantly between the two media.
Table 1. T-test scores for the five motivations
Variables F Sig T Df Lower Upper
Pass time 0,363 0,549 0,830 78 -0,419 1,1019 Entertainment 7,036 0,010 -7,536 78 -0,420 1,020 Social 0,364 0,548 -0,342 78 -0,511 0,361 Information 6,538 0,012 -0,957 78 -1,001 0,351 Convenience 10,643 0,002 2,603 78 0,171 1,281
Characteristics. The first three items that were computed measured the characteristics
of WhatsApp. The results on this scale indicate that there is no significant difference between face to face communication (M = 3,73, SD = 1,16) and WhatsApp conversations (M = 4,73,
21
SD = 1,42), t (78) =3,448 p = 0,290, not significant CI [0,42, 1,58]. This means that the characteristics of WhatsApp do not motivate an individual to choose for communicating via WhatsApp or face-to-face.
The last four items were computed to measure the characteristics of face-to-face communication. The results on this scale indicated that there was also no significant difference between face to face communication (M = 6,08, SD = 1,01) and WhatsApp conversations (M = 2,12, SD = 0,98), t (78) =17,02 p = 0,849, not significant CI [4,42, -3,49]. This indicates that the characteristics of face-to-face communication do not influence an emerging adults’ choice to communicate with others face-to-face or via WhatsApp. The results can be found in Table 2.
Table 2. T-test scores characteristics
Variables F Sig T Df Lower Upper
Char_WA 1,134 0,290 3,448 78 0,42265 1,57735 Char_FtoF 0,037 0,849 -17,022 78 -4,41907 -3,49343
Self-disclosure. Self-disclosure was divided into two different scales. One scale
measuring self-disclosure and one scale measuring self-disclosure online. The results can be found in Table 3. The data indicated that online self disclosure is not significantly higher (M = 4,30, SD = 0,90) for face-to-face communications than WhatsApp conversations (M = 3,40, SD = 0,90, t (78) = -4,46, p = 0,862, not significant CI [-1,30, -0,50]. From the results one can stat that the amount of self-disclosure is not significantly different in face-to-face or
WhatsApp conversations.
For the online self-disclosure scale a significant result is found, which is higher (M = 4,98, SD = 0,90) for face-to-face conversations than for WhatsApp conversations (M = 2,78,
22
SD = 1,27), t (78) = -8,94, p = 0,001, 99% CI [-2,69, -1,71]. The items measured aspects such as being less shy and that it would be easier to talk to people from the other gender. The results show that although this was taken under the online self-disclosure scale, these items actually score significantly higher on face-to-face communications. This indicates that individuals rather communicate face-to-face when they are less shy, opener and so on.
Table 3. T-test scores self-disclosure online and face-to-face
Variables F Sig T Df Lower Upper
Disclosure 0,030 0,862 -4,462 78 -1,30152 -0,49848 Online disclosure 11,093 0,001 -8,941 78 -2,68986 -1,171014
Average daily use. The difference between the average daily use of WhatsApp and
face-to-face communication was also analyzed and the results can be found in Table 4. A significant result is found, which is higher (M = 7,68, SD = 2,10) for face-to-face
conversations than for WhatsApp conversations (M = 3,83, SD = 1,68), t (78) = -9,05, p = 0,022, 95% CI [-4,70, -3,00]. This tells us that individuals communicate more face-to-face on average per day than they do on WhatsApp.
Table 4. T-test scores daily use
Variables F Sig T Df Lower Upper
Daily use 5,479 0,022 -9,046 78 -4,697 -3,003
Bridging. Bridging social capital was measured using five items. The results indicate
that bridging social capital is significantly higher (M = 4,97, SD = 0,80) for face-to-face conversations than for WhatsApp conversations (M = 3,02, SD = 1,18), t (78) = -8,63, p =
23
0,018, 95% CI [-2,39, -1,50]. This indicates that emerging adults use face-to-face conversations more to build bridging social capital than WhatsApp conversations.
Bonding. Bonding social capital was measured at the hand of seven items. From the
results one can derive that bonding social capital is significantly higher (M = 5,16, SD = 0,89) for face-to-face conversations than for WhatsApp conversations (M = 3,55, SD = 1,38), t (78) = -6,21, p = 0,005, 99% CI [-2,13, -1,01]. This tells us that emerging adults use face-to-face conversations more in order to build bridging social capital than they use WhatsApp
conversations for this purpose. The significant results for bridging and bonding social capital can be found in Table 5.
Table 5. T-test scores social capital
Variables F Sig T Df Lower Upper
Bridging 5,847 0,018 -8,634 78 -2,39351 -1,49649 Bonding 8,347 0,005 -6,209 78 -2,13321 -1,09536
4.2 Online self-disclosure and WhatsApp
After completing the independent sample t-tests, the correlations between self-disclosure online and face and the different concepts for WhatsApp conversations and face-to-face communications were undertaken. As proposed in the theory, online self-disclosure is thought to have a relationship with WhatsApp use, the characteristics of WhatsApp and the motivations one has for using WhatsApp. As it is not clear what this relationship is the regression analysis for the WhatsApp survey will be presented.
Online self-disclosure is measured on a four item scale. The scale is of good reliability (α=0,88). The relationship between online self-disclosure and the different motivations one can have for using WhatsApp was tested first. The regression model with online
self-24
disclosure as dependent variable and the different types of motivations for WhatsApp use as independent variables is not significant, F(11,769) = 1,565, p > 0,05. This indicates that the model cannot be used for predicting online self-disclosure. When looking at the individual results for the different motivations, these are also not significant. The results can be found in Table 6.
The characteristics of WhatsApp were measured with a scale containing four items. The reliability of the scale is good (α=0,76). The regression model with online self-disclosure as dependent variable and the characteristics of WhatsApp use as independent variables is significant, F(17,373) = 14,502, p < 0,001. This indicates that the model can be used for predicting online self-disclosure. The strength of this prediction is however weak as 27,60% of the variation in online self-disclosure can be predicted on the basis of the characteristics of WhatsApp (R2 = 0,28). The characteristics of WhatsApp B* = 0,53, t = 3,81, p < 0,001, 99% [0,26, 0,85], have a significant, weak association with a change in online self-disclosure. The results are also shown in Table 6.
Lastly, the regression analysis between WhatsApp use and online self-disclosure was completed. The regression model with WhatsApp use as dependent variable and online self-disclosure as independent variable is not significant, F(4,991) = 1,810, p > 0,05 and can be found in Table 6. This indicates that online self-disclosure does not predict WhatsApp use.
25
Table 6. Regression analysis online self-disclosure
Variables Beta t Sign. Lower Upper
Pass time 0,093 0,686 0,497 -0,182 0,367 Entertainment 0,046 0,261 0,796 -0,312 0,404 Social purposes 0,106 0,478 0,635 -0,344 0,556 Information 0,212 1,817 0,078 -0,025 0,449 Convenience 0,290 1,326 0,194 -0,154 0,734 Characteristics 0,526 3,808 0,000 0,259 0,846 WhatsApp use 0,282 1,345 0,186 -0,142 0,706
4.3 Self-disclosure and face-to-face communication
After completing the regression analysis of the WhatsApp survey, the regression analysis of the face-to-face survey was undertaken. As it is unclear what the relationship between self-disclosure and communicating face-to-face, the characteristics of face-to-face conversations and the motivations one has for communicating face-to-face is, another regression analysis was performed. Self-disclosure is measured on a six item scale. The reliability analysis shows that the scale is reliable (α=0,64). After completing the reliability analysis the relationship between self-disclosure and the different motivations one can have for using face-to-face was tested. The regression model with self-disclosure as dependent variable and the different types of motivations for face-to-face communication as independent variables is significant,
F(9,499) = 1,9, p < 0,05. This indicates that the model can be used for predicting
self-disclosure. The strength of this prediction is however weak, as only 30% of the variation in self-disclosure can be predicted on the basis of the motivations for face-to-face
communication (R2 = 0,30). The different motivations have no significant relationship with self-disclosure though. The correlations can be found in Table 7.
26
The characteristics of face-to-face conversation were measured with a scale containing four items. The reliability of the scale is good (α=0,84). The regression model with self-disclosure as dependent variable and the characteristics of face-to-face communication as independent variables is not significant, F(0,01) = 0,01, p > 0,05 and can be found in Table 7. This indicates that the model cannot be used for predicting self-disclosure.
Finally, a higher need for self-disclosure may relate to a higher use of face-to-face communication. The regression model with the prevalence of face-to-face communication as dependent variable and self-disclosure as independent variable is not significant, F(0,01) = 0,00, p > 0,05 and can be found in Table 7. This indicates that self-disclosure does not predict face-to-face communication.
Table 7. Regression analysis self-disclosure
Variables Beta t Sign Lower Upper
Pass time 0,200 1,304 0,201 -0,064 0,293 Entertainment 0,078 0,390 0,699 -0,343 0,506 Social 0,276 1,579 0,124 -,078 0,619 Information 0,112 0,622 0,538 -0,175 0,330 Convenience 0,151 0,880 0,385 -0,122 0,308 Characteristics -0,014 -0,108 0,914 -0,284 0,255 Face-to-face -0,021 -0,009 0,957 -0,787 0,746
5. Conclusion
In order to structure the conclusion section of this paper, all the research questions will be addressed and answered separately and chronologically.
27
RQ1: Which motivations influence the choice for communicating face-to-face or via WhatsApp?
There are differences between the motivations that emerging adults have for communicating face-to-face or by the means of WhatsApp. These differences can be acquitted to three motivations, namely ‘entertainment purposes’, ‘the finding and sharing of information’ and ‘convenience’. Two motivations were significantly higher for face-to-face communication. These were the ‘entertainment purposes’ and ‘the finding and sharing of information’. This indicates that emerging adults will rather talk face-to-face to obtain or provide information about something and for entertainment reasons than they are motivated to communicate via WhatsApp. The motivation ‘convenience’ is higher for WhatsApp. This means that if emerging adults are looking for an easy way to talk to someone else, they are inclined to use WhatsApp over communicating face-to-face. This was not a very surprising finding, as one could expect that emerging adults would turn to WhatsApp for its convenience. No significant results were found for the motivations of ‘passing time’ and ‘social’. These results indicate that when emerging adults are bored or want to meet someone else, they will just as easily turn to WhatsApp as meet in person.
RQ2: What characteristics of face-to-face communication and WhatsApp influence the choice for using one of the two media?
There are no significant differences between the characteristics of WhatsApp and face-to-face influencing the choice for one of the two media. This indicates that emerging adults do not turn to one of the two media due to their specific characteristics such as face-to-face
28
of the different characteristics of WhatsApp and face-to-face communication and that they would utilize one of the two media in situations that best fit its use. The results however indicate that this is not the case. This suggests that emerging adults turn to either one of the two media regardless of its characteristics.
RQ3: What is the relationship between the characteristics of WhatsApp, the use of WhatsApp, the motivations to use WhatsApp and online self-disclosure?
The only significant relationship the current study found was the positive relationship between online self-disclosure and the characteristics of WhatsApp. This indicates that the disclosing of information online increases with a higher recognition of the characteristics of WhatsApp. This can be explained due to the items that measure online self-disclosure as these items are related to the characteristics of WhatsApp. One of the item measures the directness of WhatsApp, which is also a characteristic of WhatsApp for example. The motivations of WhatsApp and the use of WhatsApp were not significantly related to online self-disclosure. This indicates that when emerging adults or higher levels of motivation and use WhatsApp more, they do not disclose more information about themselves online. This could mean that emerging adults turn to other (online) media in order to fulfill their online self-disclosing need.
RQ4: What is the relationship between the motivations of face-to-face communication, the characteristics of face-to-face communication, the amount of face-to-face communication and self-disclosure?
29
In relation to self-disclosing information face-to-face, a positive, significant relationship was found between the motivations for communicating face and self-disclosure face. This indicates that when emerging adults are more motivated to communicate face-to-face they disclose information about ones’ self more. This relationship was however very weak and none of the motivations individually had a significant relationship with self-disclosure. This could mean that there are other motivations that influence the disclosing of information about ones’ self. No other significant relationships were found. This indicates that a better awareness of the characteristics of face-to-face communication and the prevalence of communicating face-to-face does not relate to a change in the disclosing of information about ones’ self face-to-face.
RQ5: What is the difference between disclosing information about ones’ self on WhatsApp and in face-to-face conversations?
The results show that there is no difference for self-disclosing information face-to-face or by the use of WhatsApp as there is no significant difference for the two. This indicates that emerging adults with a higher need for self-disclosure do not turn to one of the two media specifically. It would seem that a higher need for self-disclosure is fulfilled with either one of the two media.
The most remarkable result however is that online self-disclosure is higher for face-to-face conversation than WhatsApp conversations. This entails that emerging adults who have a higher score on the online self-disclosure score turn to face-to-face communication in order to satisfy this need. The online self-disclosure items investigate aspects of face-to-face
conversations that could be frightening for emerging adults and offers WhatsApp as an alternative. What this study however finds is that for emerging adults these aspects of
face-to-30
face communication are not seen as negative, or something that needs an alternative. These aspects are actually seen as positive, something that is less apparent with WhatsApp.
RQ 6: To what extend do WhatsApp and face-to-face conversations lead to a difference between bonding- and bridging social capital?
The results indicate that both bridging- and bonding social capital occurs more in face-to-face conversations. WhatsApp is also used to build social capital, but WhatsApp is used
significantly lower for social capital aims than face-to-face communication is. As the building of social capital can be seen as the building and maintaining of social relationships, these significant results indicate that when presented with the choice, emerging adults choose for face-to-face conversations over conversing via WhatsApp. It is hard to pinpoint what the reason is for these findings. One would argue that face-to-face communication simply occurs more as emerging adults meet other people frequently in their day to day life. The specific reasons that face-to-face communications lead to more social capital are more difficult to decipher.
In conclusion, this study looked at multiple items investigating the motivations for and the characteristics of the use of WhatsApp and face-to-face communication. This study also investigated self-disclosure online and face-to-face, the use of WhatsApp and face-to-face communication and social capital. Even though this was not a research question, the current study concludes with the three items that scored the highest averages on the two different versions of the survey. Regarding the face-to-face survey, these were two items measuring the characteristics of face-to-face communication, namely the presence of nonverbal cues (M = 6,35, SD = 1,03) and that it is a natural way of communicating (M = 6,10, SD = 1,65). The third highest item was a motivation, namely communicating face-to-face for social purposes
31
(M = 6,03, SD = 0,92). Using WhatsApp for social purposes was the highest scoring item on the WhatsApp survey (M = 5,95, SD = 1,04). The second highest scoring item was on self-disclosure, namely talking on WhatsApp about work and/or study (M = 5,55, SD = 1,01). The third highest item was on the characteristics of WhatsApp, namely that WhatsApp is an easy way to stay in contact with other people (M = 5,35, SD = 1,53) Both surveys show that social purposes are an important reason for emerging adults to talk on WhatsApp and face-to-face. The other two highest scoring items for face-to-face communication were the characteristics of face-to-face communication. Even though there was no significant difference it seems that certain characteristics for face-to-face communication are an important reason for emerging adults to choose that medium. It seems that the convenience of WhatsApp and the disclosing of information about work and/or study are important reasons for emerging adults choosing that medium. This again shows that there are different reasons for emerging adults to communicate via WhatsApp or face-to-face.
6. Discussion
In the first part of this section, the results shall be related to the theory. Firstly, the
motivations for using WhatsApp or conversing face-to-face shall be addressed. By studying earlier research on the motivations for using online media, five dimensions were found (Rubin & Papacharissi, 2000; Lampe et al., 2010; Eighmey, 1997; Korgaonkar & Wolin, 1999; Kaye & Johnson, 2004; Cho, 2007; Barker, 2009). However, only the motivation convenience was found to be a higher need for using WhatsApp. As the other motivations were also found by studying earlier research on the determents of online communication, it is surprising that these are not higher for WhatsApp. This is especially the case for the motivations ‘entertainment’ and ‘providing and seeking of information’ as the results indicate that these motivate
32
emerging adults to communicate face-to-face rather than via WhatsApp. It is hard to provide an explanation for this finding.
From the media richness theory the current study derived that people actively turn to a medium to satisfy their needs which relates to the characteristics of the two media. The media richness theory is a long studied and proven theory (Watters, 1992). The current study found that regarding face-to-face and WhatsApp conversations, people do not choose one of the two media, but are fine using either one of them, even though WhatsApp is leaner. This could implicate that WhatsApp may give emerging adults the feeling that there is not a big difference between the characteristics of the two media.
The current study also investigated self-disclosure online and face-to-face. Regarding online self-disclosure, a positive relationship was found with the characteristics of WhatsApp. This was expected from the literature as online self-disclosure contains items which are related to accessibility, asynchrocinity and the lack of nonverbal cues (Ledbetter et al., 2011). There may however be other characteristics of WhatsApp or other aspects of online self-disclosure that are more prone for the choice as the relationship is weak. It would be easier to state more on this aspect if one could say something about the causality between the two concepts. This is however impossible as this study conducted a regression analysis. This analysis does not allow for conclusions on the direction of the relationship. One would also suspect that the need for disclosing information online would have a significant relationship with the use of WhatsApp and the motivations for using WhatsApp. This is however not the case. This could mean that emerging adults who have higher online self-disclosure means seek other kinds of online media to fulfill this need.
The results indicate that the motivations for conversing face-to-face are related to disclosing information face-to-face. It was hard to find literature on the motivations for communicating face-to-face. The relationship that emerging adults disclose more information
33
face-to-face when they are more motivated to communicate face-to-face is however not very surprising. The relationship is weak though, which could again mean that there are other motivations that influence the disclosing of information face-to-face. It is again not possible to say anything on the direction of the relationship as a regression analysis does not allow for causality. One could also suspect that self-disclosing information face-to-face would relate to communicating face-to-face and the characteristics of face-to-face communication. This was however not the case and indicates that emerging adults disclose information about ones’ self regardless of the medium and its characteristics.
No difference between disclosing information about ones’ self on WhatsApp or face-to-face was found. The current study could not find previous studies investigating if emerging adults rather disclose information face-to-face or online. These results indicate that there is no difference. A surprising result is that online self-disclosure is significantly higher for face-to-face conversations. Previous studies however state that online self-disclosure relates
positively to the use of online media (Antheunis et al., 2012; Wang, Jackson & Zang, 2011). A way to explain these results could be attributed to the rich-get-richer hypothesis. This hypothesis states that people who are socially apt face-to-face, will use other media to reap even more benefits (Desjarlais & Willoughby, 2010). As the media richness theory says that people actively search for the best medium to fit their purpose, it seems that these findings indicate that the emerging adults in the sample are socially apt. As they were proposed with the chance to choose between two media, they choose the richest medium to fulfill their communication needs.
The last concepts that were studied were bonding- and bridging social capital. Both forms of social capital occur more through face-to-face conversations, or so the results of this study indicate. Bryant et al. (2006) stated that people would turn to face-to-face communications for bonding social capital. The results indeed indicate that emerging adults speak face-to-face
34
with their strong ties more often than via WhatsApp. WhatsApp is however more personal now due to you needing someone’s phone number. This could mean that the differences found are smaller now than they would have been with other social networking sites.
Earlier studies on different online media found that bridging social capital occurs frequently online (Ellison, Seinfeld & Lampe, 2007; Donath & Boyd, 2004). However, seeing as you need someone’s number with WhatsApp, this may be the threshold that limits the opportunities of meeting new people and establishing weak ties. This difference between WhatsApp and other online media may be the reason that bridging social capital was found to be more apparent in face-to-face conversations.
As till now, these were all scientific implications. There are however also practical
implications. One of the main focusing points of the current study was social capital, which is formed and maintained through social relationships (Williams, 2006). In order to create and maintain social relationships, this study shows that face-to-face conversation is the better choice. This is an important finding for the everyday life of emerging adults, as they are shown to be one of the greatest consumers of WhatsApp. It is wise that they remember that they should always try to primarily communicate face-to-face given the choice. One exception to always trying to communicate face-to-face, is that emerging adults can turn to WhatsApp as it is convenient. As the creating and maintaining of social relationships is better face-to-face, small, non-important things which are convenient to ask via WhatsApp is the only reason that someone should turn to WhatsApp, or so this study finds. Also, the results of the current study indicate that WhatsApp is different from other online media. Where other online media is used a lot for bridging social capital, and possibly even more than face-to-face conversations (Ellison, Seinfeld & Lampe, 2007; Williams, 2007; Ledbetter et al., 2011; Choi, Kim, Sung & Sohn, 2010), the results indicate that WhatsApp is used less than face-to-face
35
conversations. This means that emerging adults should turn to other media in order to meet new people or maintain weak ties.
There was also a limitation to the current study. The scale that measured the
characteristics of WhatsApp and face-to-face conversations was confusing. Because this study wanted to investigate if the different characteristics would influence the choice between communicating face-to-face or by the use of WhatsApp, the items had to include the same content across the two surveys. However, people adequately noticed that some of the characteristics did not fit the surveyed medium. This made them confused, thinking that the items were wrong for example. This may have influenced the results.
The current study recommends a couple of subjects which could be studied in future research. This study showed that regarding bridging social capital, face-to-face is utilized more than WhatsApp. Previous research however always emphasized that online media are better for establishing bridging social capital, as it is easier to come in contact with new people (Ellison, Seinfeld & Lampe, 2007; Williams, 2007; Ledbetter et al., 2011; Choi, Kim, Sung & Sohn, 2010). It would be interesting to investigate the differences between bridging social capital on older forms of online media and WhatsApp.
Furthermore, it seems on the whole that WhatsApp is different from previous online media such as Facebook and instant messaging sites. An example of this can be found in the conclusion that online self-disclosure leads to people rather communicating face-to-face. This result stresses the importance of investigating how different WhatsApp is in relation to other online media. As the current research also pointed out that it was very hard to find any previous research on WhatsApp it is recommended to further investigate WhatsApp to fully understand how WhatsApp is different from other media and what this means for the everyday life of WhatsApp users.
36
Finally, three items were found to have the highest scores and so be the best predictors of the choice for communicating face-to-face or by the use of WhatsApp. It would be interesting to investigate these items further and see if these are indeed the main predictors for choosing to communicate face-to-face or by the means of WhatsApp. This could stimulate further understanding of the dynamics between choosing one of the two media for certain reasons.
37
Literature
Alison Bryant, J., Sanders‐Jackson, A., & Smallwood, A. M. (2006). IMing, text messaging, and adolescent social networks. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 11(2), 577-592.
Antheunis, M. L., Schouten, A. P., Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2012). Interactive uncertainty reduction strategies and verbal affection in computer-mediated
communication. Communication Research, 39(6), 757-780.
Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469-480.
Barker, V. (2009). Older adolescents' motivations for social network site use: The influence of gender, group identity, and collective self-esteem. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(2), 209-213.
Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. University of Chicago press.
Cho, S. H. (2007). Effects of motivations and gender on adolescents' self-disclosure in online chatting. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(3), 339-345.
38
Choi, S. M., Kim, Y., Sung, Y., & Sohn, D. (2011). Bridging or bonding? A cross-cultural study of social relationships in social networking sites. Information, Communication &
Society, 14(1), 107-129.
Church, K., & de Oliveira, R. (2013). What's up with WhatsApp?: Comparing mobile instant messaging behaviors with traditional SMS. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference
on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, 352-361.
Cijfers WhatsApp-gebruik in Nederland. (2014, 7 July). Retreived 15 June, 2015, from
http://androidworld.nl/apps/cijfers-WhatsApp-gebruik-nederland/
Cozby, P. C. (1973). Self-disclosure: A literature review. Psychological Bulletin, 79(2), 73-91.
De Boer, C., & Brennecke, S. I. (2003). Media en publiek. theorieën over media-impact.
Desjarlais, M., & Willoughby, T. (2010). A longitudinal study of the relation between adolescent boys and girls’ computer use with friends and friendship quality: Support for the social compensation or the rich-get-richer hypothesis? Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 896-905.
Donath, J., & Boyd, D. (2004). Public displays of connection. Bt Technology Journal, 22(4), 71-82.
39
Eighmey, J. (1997). Profiling user responses to commercial websites. Journal of Advertising
Research, 37, 59-66.
Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of facebook “friends:” social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer‐
Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143-1168.
Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2001). Internet use in the contemporary media environment. Human Communication Research, 27(1), 153-181.
Jourard, S. M., & Lasakow, P. (1958). Some factors in self-disclosure. The Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 56(1), 91-98.
Kalmijn, M. (2003). Shared friendship networks and the life course: An analysis of survey data on married and cohabiting couples. Social Networks, 25(3), 231-249.
Kaye, B. K., & Johnson, T. J. (2004). A web for all reasons: Uses and gratifications of internet components for political information. Telematics and Informatics, 21(3), 197-223.
Kim, H., Kim, G. J., Park, H. W., & Rice, R. E. (2007). Configurations of relationships in different media: FtF, email, instant messenger, mobile phone, and SMS. Journal of Computer‐
40
Ko, H., Roberts, M. S., & Cho, C. (2006). Cross-cultural differences in motivations and perceived interactivity: A comparative study of american and korean internet users. Journal of
Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 28(2), 93-104.
Korgaonkar, P. K., & Wolin, L. D. (1999). A multivariate analysis of web usage. Journal of
Advertising Research, 39, 53-68.
Lampe, C., Wash, R., Velasquez, A., & Ozkaya, E. (2010). Motivations to participate in online communities. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems, 1927-1936.
Ledbetter, A. M., Mazer, J. P., De Groot, J. M., Meyer, K. R., Mao, Y., & Swafford, B. (2010). Attitudes toward online social connection and self-disclosure as predictors of facebook communication and relational closeness. Communication Research, 38(1), 27-53.
Papacharissi, Z., & Rubin, A. M. (2000). Predictors of internet use. Journal of Broadcasting
& Electronic Media, 44(2), 175-196.
Putnam, R.D. (2000). Bowling Alone. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Schouten, A. P., Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2007). Precursors and underlying processes of adolescents' online self-disclosure: Developing and testing an
