Social Media Use and Civic Engagement
Among Emerging Adults
Muhammad Fikri | 10631836 A Master Thesis
Graduate School of Communication Track Entertainment Communication University of Amsterdam – The Netherlands
Supervisor: Rinaldo Kühne, PhD 25 June 2015
Social Media Use and Civic Engagement Among Emerging Adults
Previous studies indicate that social media usage contributes to civic engagement among emerging adults. However, the number of studies discussing psychological mechanisms such as social capital, self-efficacy, and self-consistency mediate the relationship between social media use and civic engagement are limited. The current study aims to investigate if psychological mechanisms mediate the relationship between social media use and civic engagement by conducting an online survey of 247 Indonesian emerging adults. The study has multiple mediation models that include civic duty, civic skills, and civic participation as dependent variables and social media use as an independent variable. After controlling gender, age, overall media use, income and education, the results show that overall social media use and active social media use in a public setting significantly predict civic participation, whereas active social media use in a private setting significantly predicts civic duty. Only the bridging dimension of social capital significantly mediates the relationship between active social media use in a private setting and civic duty. Furthermore, the effect of control variables on each dimension of civic engagement is discussed.
Keywords: Social media, civic engagement, civic duty, civic skills, civic participation, social capital, bridging, bonding, self-efficacy, self-consistency, indirect effects, mediation processes, emerging adults.
In Indonesia, the Internet and social media use have grown excessively over the last four years. One social marketing agency, “We Are Social” reported that as of January 2015, the Internet penetration rate in Indonesia reached 28% and the total number of social media accounts increased from 40,8 million users in 2011 to 72 million users (We Are Social, 2015). This number equates to 28% of more than 240 million Indonesians. The annual growth in the number of active social media accounts reached 16% since January 2014. The report also mentioned that the average time spent on social media is 2 hours 52 minutes per day and the amount of the population using social media applications is 14%.
The popularity of social media in Indonesia can affect different spheres of social life. For example, a recent study conducted by Gil de Zuniga, Jung, and Valenzuela (2012) explains the relationship between social media use and users’ civic behaviors in an
Indonesian context. The study suggests that the use of social media significantly increases the likelihood of individuals to participate in politics and their social capital. In order to elaborate on the psychological mechanism and the nature of the relationship between social media use and civic engagement, the present study focuses on how the development of social capital, self-efficacy, and self-consistency mediate the relationship between social media use and civic engagement. By conducting an online survey, this study will shed light on the specific dynamics at play in the Indonesian context, notably on the knowledge about the psychological mechanisms of Indonesian social media users. The knowledge can certainly contribute to the policy makers’ understanding of how to increase civic engagement among Indonesian youths and how they can contribute to the betterment of society.
In this study, I first discuss social media use among emerging adults along with its definition. Secondly, I then discuss the concept of civic engagement, social capital, self-efficacy, and self-consistency that are followed by hypothesis formulation. Thirdly, I describe the design and the results of an online survey that tested the hypotheses. Finally, I discuss the findings and suggestions for future studies.
Social Media Use Among Emerging Adults
Howard and Parks (2012) defined social media as follows:
In our view, social media may be defined in three parts, consisting of (a) the information infrastructure and tools used to produce and distribute content; (b) the content that takes the digital form of personal messages, news, ideas, and cultural products; and (c) the people, organizations, and industries that produce and consume digital content (p. 362).
This definition discusses three elements of social media: social media as a tool to produce certain content, social media as digital content, and the users of social media itself. This new form of media allows its users to have an online interaction on a continual basis as they can communicate online by chatting, sharing pictures and videos at any time. This technology may help the users to express more creativity as social media enables its users to produce multimedia content that can be reproduced easily such as text, graphics, and audio. Social media users can connect to a wider audience through the content they produce, therefore, it is worth considering the more social connections that an individual has, the likelihood to have social interaction may increase as well (Strasburger et al., 2013).
reported that Facebook and Twitter are the most popular social media platforms among American emerging adults (The Pew Foundation, 2014). Furthermore, the report mentioned the use of multiple social media platforms among emerging adults increased from 43% in 2013 to 53% in 2014. The rise of social media usage among emerging adults led to the question of why social media is so popular among them. Therefore, understanding the characteristics of emerging adults and how they are different compared to the other age groups is important.
Arnett (2000) describes emerging adulthood as the period of one’s life phase between late adolescence and early adulthood. Emerging adults are aged between 18 to the late twenties, do not have children, and earn insufficient income to live independently. Arnett (2000) also states that emerging adults tend to be “self-focused”. Self-focused during emerging adulthood implies that any decision related to life or their preferences refers to a “what’s in it for me?” orientation. This would appear to be selfish, however, “self-focus” in this context is that all activities including using social media appeals to the needs and the motivation that drives them.
Moreover, social media enables emerging adults to build an intimate relationship with others in ways unlike before. In particular, moving from one residence to another during emerging adulthood is frequent (Arnett, 2000), therefore, social media can help them to maintain social ties. Understanding emerging adults’ media preference on social media is important in order to answer the question of why social media is so popular among them. Coyne et al. (2013) suggest emerging adults use social media to explore their identity. Getting involved in civic engagement might relate to emerging adults’ way to explore their identity and their role in the society. Compared to traditional media such as television or radio, emerging adults prefer social media due to the online environment that can be accessed at anytime and anywhere.
Civic Engagement
Several scholars of social sciences have defined the term civic engagement differently. Zhong (2014) defined civic engagement as a voluntary activity that contributes to problem-solving and helping others. In his definition, civic engagement included working for NGO’s (non-government organizations), getting involved with the community and participating in public affairs. Another definition of civic engagement came from Diller (2001). In his definition, civic engagement refers to community service, voluntary work, and community
action. This action could be conducted either by a single person or as a group and has the purpose of building a better community. As the process of community building relates to individual participation, Putnam (2000) defines civic engagement as an individual’s involvement in communities and politics. In his definition, Putnam mainly focuses his studies on all activities conducted by a person within the community in order to build social capital. However, in this current study, civic engagement will be defined by the measure of cognition, emotion and behavior of individuals (Bobek et al., 2009). This definition is based on the action theory that argues cognitive, emotional and behavioral processes are interconnected. From this assumption, they suggested that civic engagement as one’s sense of belonging to a certain community followed by certain actions to contribute for others. In this definition, they believe that being civically engaged on an emotional level does not mean one can accomplish certain civic tasks. Therefore, it is important to look at civic engagement through the following three dimensions: emotion (civic duty), cognitive (civic skills) and behavior (civic participation). Understanding each dimension of civic engagement among emerging adults might give deeper information on their civic engagement in the society.
The characteristic of social media allows online interaction, enables emerging adults to maintain interpersonal ties anywhere at anytime. The motivation of an individual using social media also relates to the connectivity hypothesis (Matei & Ball-Rokeach, 2003). According to this hypothesis, individuals are encouraged more to contribute on certain issues when they consume media content. This is because they are made more aware of social problems and have the motivation to use media not only to fulfill their personal needs but also to connect and contribute to the community (Matei & Ball-Rokeach, 2003). In other words, the connectivity hypothesis implies individuals who are exposed to media content, especially social related problems, are more likely to contribute to solving the problem and be a part of a movement for change. In addition, several studies also suggest that using media for information acquisition was positively associated with the individual-level production of social participation (McLeod et al., 1999; Shah, 1998; Zhang & Chia, 2006).
The effect of media use on civic engagement can be applied on social media context. Gil de Zuniga and Valenzuela (2011) conducted a study that focused on the relationship between Social Network Sites (SNS) and users’ civic behaviors among American adults. The result of the study suggested that higher civic engagement occurs among individuals who have larger networks than those who have smaller networks. Another study conducted by Shah et al. (2002) suggested that those who are actively involved in online communities
could increase their social skills and the likelihood to participate in politics. The fact that communication processes among SNS users led to the exchange of information including opportunities and problem-solving, it can be seen that this interaction on social media might also influence civic attitude (McLeod et al, 1999). Therefore, based on literature mentioned above, the first hypothesis of this study is that the more emerging adults use social media, the more likely they participate in civic engagement (H1).
Social Capital
Putnam (1995) defines social capital as the strength of social connection or the social network of an individual. According to this definition, being connected and having social networks are important in order to live in society. Putnam (2000) further mentioned two types of social capital: bridging and bonding. Bridging social capital refers to the connection made by individuals at an initial stage, whereas bonding social capital refers to the connection made by individuals who share a strong personal connection (Williams, 2006). Individuals who only have bridging social capital are more likely to use their social contacts as a source of information, whereas individuals who have bonding social capital are more likely to have stronger emotions for their social contacts and interact on a deeper level.
As social media enables its user to get involved in online interaction and social contacts, social media can also influence their social capital. Burke, Kraut and Marlow (2011) discussed two reasons why social media contributes to social capital. Firstly, exchanging personal information and increasing self-disclosure in social media can increase social support (Oswald, Clark, and Kelly, 2004). Individuals who have higher social interaction are more likely to have more social contacts that may support them. Secondly, the duration and intimacy that occurs during the interaction on social media can strengthen the bond of a relationship (Gilbert & Karahalios, 2009). Therefore, it is expected that the more emerging adults use social media, the more likely they have a strong social capital (H2a).
In relation to civic engagement and social activities, the number of friends, family or relatives reflects the strength of social capital and also positively relates to social participation (Leighley, 1990; McLeod, Scheufele, & Moy, 1999). Kimm and Ball-Rokeach (2006) argued that access to certain communities through social networks also led to an increase in the likelihood of individuals to participate in civic engagement. The larger the network an individual has, the more likely he/she has an intention to engage in a certain community. Shah et al. (2005) also suggested that civic engagement could be influenced by
the frequency of individuals to be involved in a public discussion. Therefore, the third hypothesis of this study is that emerging adults who have higher social capital are more likely to participate in civic engagement (H2b).
Self-efficacy
Self-efficacy refers to an individual’s belief that she/he can accomplish a certain task in a particular situation (Bandura, 1997). An individual who has strong self-efficacy believes that he/she can perform certain tasks successfully. Self-efficacy works in line with the social cognitive theory that argues an individual should exercise regulatory behaviour and self-reflective processes in order to be successful in adapting to their situation (Bandura, 1999). Being self-regulatory refers to one’s ability to regulate their own actions and behavior by adjusting to their observations, whereas a self-reflective process refers to one’s self-reflection and attempts to understand and explore their own experiences accordingly. In social cognitive theory, observational learning is a source of information where cognitive knowledge and behavior develops throughout a lifetime. During the process of social interaction and human development stages, individuals can develop their perception of self-efficacy by learning from their social environments such as family, friends, and colleagues. The social interaction between individuals and their social environments allows them to increase their belief to accomplish certain tasks. Self-efficacy in the present study focuses on civic attitude towards community services (Weber, 2004). Self-efficacy in this context refers to an individual’s belief that she/he can have an impact in the society. Weber (2004) specifically pointed out that self-efficacy towards service contributes to the likelihood of individuals to participate in civic activities.
The nature of social media allows its users to create content and have control over when and how to respond to an interaction. Hence, social media has become a platform to learn and enhance certain skills through the exchange of information. Hocevar, Flanagin, and Metzger (2014) argue that creating and generating online content in social media can increase self-efficacy and self-confidence. The nature of social media allows individuals to have the power to create content as well as tailor their own media consumption. Online interaction with their peers on social media enables an individual to have control over what kind of interaction they engage in. Furthermore, receiving feedback and comments on the content created on social media can also contribute to self-efficacy as it can enhance one’s ability to create more engaging content (Hocevar, Flanagin & Metzger, 2014). The more an individual
receives feedback and comments on their behavior, the likelihood to gain self-efficacy is high as they partake in the self reflection process. Therefore, it is proposed to hypothesize the more emerging adults use social media, the more likely they have a higher sense of self-efficacy (H3a).
As self-efficacy relates to the degree in which emerging adults’ believe in their ability to accomplish a certain task, it is plausible that individuals who have high self-efficacy also have high self-confidence. A study conducted by Schwarzer (1994) argued that the ability of individual to cope across a wide variety of political situations could relate to personal competence such as self-confidence. Lasorsa (1991) suggested that people who have high self-efficacy are more likely to believe in their ability to contribute and make a difference in the community. Applying this logic to a civic context, it is worth considering that emerging adults who have high self-efficacy might be interested in contributing to the community, as they believe that they have capacity to make a difference and a change. Therefore, I propose that emerging adults who have high self-efficacy are more likely to participate in civic engagement (H3b).
Self-Consistency
As social media allows emerging adults to create an online profile, social media is also a platform for everyone to create their own online self-representation. An account on Facebook or Twitter has become a powerful tool for anyone who wants to promote him or herself publicly online. Friends on Facebook and Twitter who live far away can understand one’s life situation based on what they post online. However, several studies suggest that such situation might lead individuals to selectively create their online presence (Bargh, McKenna & Fitzsimmons, 2002; Ellison, Heino, & Gibbs, 2006). Hence, what social media users present and post on social media does not always reflect who they are in real life.
An individual’s self-concept in social media is influenced by how individuals are aware of their audience and how they feel the sense of “publicness” (Kelly & Rodriguez, 2006; Tice, 1992; Schlenker, Dlugolecki, & Doherty, 1994). That said, self-concept is more likely to change when adjusting to what is performed publicly rather than privately (Tice, 1992). Those who are aware of their actions in a public environment might be more cautious when posting content on social media. In addition, a study conducted by Schelenker et al. (1994) argued that an individual that is committed to his or her self-representation is also concerned about “public commitment”. Those who frequently engage in social media and reveal
+H3b +H4b H1 +H3a +H2a +H2b +H4a
themselves online should consider all materials that they post. Such individuals like to be perceived as consistent by the public. Therefore, as social media is a platform for social interaction and relates to “public commitment”, it is hypothesized that the more emerging adults use social media, the more likely they are motivated to be self-consistent (H4a).
In relation to “public commitment”, Cialdini et al. (1995) argued that the level of an individual’s commitment to public opinion could relate to the level of consistency they may have. Cialdini et al. (1995) suggested that self-consistency includes internal and public consistency. In this study, it was found that individuals that have a high level of consistency are more likely to demonstrate a strong preference for congruity with their own behavior in any situation. The more these individuals are concerned about “public commitment” on social media, the more likely they live their online presence in real life. Another study relates to self-consistency and supports Cialdini’s argument was conducted by Newby-Clark, McGregor, and Zanna (2002). The study shows that self-consistency moderates the relationship between attitude and unpleasant feelings when faced by conflict. Applying this finding to the civic context, it sounds plausible that individuals who have high self-consistency are more likely to feel unpleasant when it comes to social issues or civic problems such as poverty, education, and health. In order to reduce their unpleasant feelings and show that they are a good person, they have strong intention to contribute to solve social problems (Khan & Dhar, 2007; Mazar & Zhong, 2010). Therefore, I propose that emerging adults who have high self-consistency have a higher likelihood to engage civically (H4b).
Figure 1. Mediation model of the present study. The figure above shows that social media use predicts social civic engagement (H1) and social capital, self-efficacy, and self-consistency plays a role as a psychological mechanism that mediates the
Social Capital Self-consistency Self-efficacy Overall social media use Civic Engagement
relationship between social media use and civic engagement (H2a, H2b, H3a, H3b, H4a, and H4b).
Method Sample
The data used in this study was collected through an online survey conducted on 13-15 May 2015. The participants consisted of 247 Indonesian emerging adults who were between 18 to 30 years old and had access to the Internet and social media. About 43.7% of the sample is male and 56.3% is female. Most participants are 18 years old which is 16.2% of total sample size. Most participants (about 40.1%) of total sample earn less than 1,500,000 rupiahs per month (M = 2.41, SD = 1.54). The lowest education background of the participants was junior high school and the highest was a doctorate level (M = 5.39, SD = 1.06). Most participants or about 53.8% of sample size hold a bachelor’s degree.
Procedure
The internet link for the online questionnaire of this study was spread using Facebook and Twitter to attract participants. To obtain agreement from participants, an online consent form was provided at the beginning of the questionnaire. Once participants agreed to participate, they filled the survey in within 10 to 15 minutes. All information provided by participants was anonymous. At the end of the survey, all participants were asked if they would like to be included in a draw for a randomly selected participation prize. There were 3 winners who received a prize worth 100 euros each. All procedures of the study was approved by the Ethical Committee of the University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Measures
Overall social media use. The first independent variable of this study is the overall social media use that is inspired by Frison and Eggermont (2015). It consists of 3 dimensions: active social media use in a public setting (3 items), active social media use in a private setting (2 items) and passive social media use (2 items). For each item of each dimension, participants are asked to indicate from 1 (never) to 5 (always) how often they perform a particular activity on social media (e.g., ‘‘How often do you update your status on your own social media account’’, α = 0.71). These 7 items were combined to construct the overall index of social media use (M = 2.99, SD = .57).
Type of social media usage. This study is also interested in investigating the effect of the different type of social media use on civic engagement based on active and passive categories. From the overall index of social media use, these were split into 3 indices: active social media use in a public setting, active social media use in a private setting and passive social media use. The index of active social media use in a public setting is measured by 3 items (e.g., ‘‘How often do you post a message on your own social media account’’, α = 0.70). These items are combined to construct an index of active social media use in a public setting (M = 2.74, SD = .70). Index of active social media use in a private setting is measured by 2 items (e.g., “How often do you send someone a personal message on your social media account?”, α = 0.85). These items are combined to construct an index of active social media use in a private setting (M = 3.38, SD = .93). Index of passive social media use is measured by 2 items (e.g., ‘‘How often do you visit a social media profile of a friend?”, α = 0.74). These items are combined to construct an index of passive social media use (M = 2.96, SD = .85).
Civic engagement. The scale of civic engagement is adapted from Bobek et al. (2009) and consists of 25 items. The scale contains 3 dimensions: civic duty, civic skills, and civic participation. An index of civic duty is measured by 11 items using a 5-likert scale from 1 (not at all important) to 5 (very important). An example of one of these questions is “How important is helping other people in your life?” (M = 4.13, SD = .36). The scale has an acceptable reliability (α = 0.70). An index of civic skills was measured with 6 items from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent). Another example of one of these questions is “If you found out about the problem in your community that you wanted to do something about (for example illegal drugs), how well do you think you would be able to contact newspaper, radio, or TV talk show to express your opinion?” (M = 3.50, SD = .51). The scale has an acceptable reliability (α = .63). An index of civic participation is measured with 8 items using a 5-likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always). An example of one of these questions is “How often do you help your neighbor?” (M = 3.31, SD = .63). The reliability test showed that the scale has an acceptable reliability as well (α = 0.79).
Social capital. The scale used to measure social capital in the present study is the scale constructed by Williams (2006) that consists of 2 dimensions: bridging (online/offline) and bonding scale (online/offline). Participants were asked how much they agree or disagree for each item of each dimension ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The index of social capital is split into 2 indices. An index of bridging scale is measured with 10
items (e.g., “Interacting with people online/offline makes me want to try new things”, α = 0.86). All these items are combined to construct the index of bridging scale (M = 4.27, SD = .46). An index of bonding scale is measured with 10 items (e.g., “There are several people online/offline I trust to help solve my problems”, α = .83). All these items are combined to construct the index of social capital bonding scale (M = 3.58, SD = .55).
Self-efficacy towards service (SETS). The scale used to measure self-efficacy in the present study is the scale constructed by Weber et al (2004) that consists of 5 items. Participants were asked from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) how much they agree or disagree for each item (e.g., “I can make a difference in my community”, α = 0.75). All these items are combined to construct the index of Self-efficacy (M = 3.88, SD = .48).
Self-consistency. The scale used to measure self-consistency in the present study is the scale constructed by Cialdini et al. (1995) and consisted of 18 items. The scale measures the likelihood of an individual to behave and act consistently with their belief. For each item, participants were asked from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) how much they agree or disagree (e.g., “It is important to me that my actions are consistent with my beliefs”, α = .85). All these items were combined to construct the index of self-consistency.
Socio-demographic variables. Age (M = 22.99, SD = 3.90) and gender (Male = 43.7% and Female = 56.3%) were measured. Income is measured by asking participants “What is your total household income per month?” ranging from 1 (less than 1,500,000 rupiahs per month) to 6 (more than 10,000,000 rupiahs per month) (M = 2.41, SD = 1.54). The education level of the participants is measured by asking their most recent education background ranging from 1 (No schooling completed) to 8 (Doctorate) (M = 5.39, SD = 1.06).
Overall media use. Overall media use is a control variable. This variable is important to compare the difference between the effect of social media use and the effect of overall media use on civic engagement. The scale of media use in this study is constructed by Zhang and Chia (2006) and consists of 4 dimensions: reading newspaper, watching public affairs on TV, watching entertainment programs and internet use in general. Reading newspaper is measured by asking participants to indicate from 1 (never) to 5 (always) if they are exposed to the following type of news: international news, local politics and editorials (α =.87, M = 3.12, SD = 1.04). Watching public affairs on TV is measured by asking participants to indicate from 1 (no attention) to 5 (very much attention) about their attention to the following TV content: international news, national news, local politics, and editorials (α = .78, M = 3.20, SD = .84). Watching entertainment program on TV is measured by asking participants
to indicate from 1 (never) to 5 (very often) about how frequently they watch a TV series, a reality show and/or a social drama (α = .75, M = 2.08, SD = .79). Internet use is measured by asking participants to indicate from 1 (never) to 5 (always) how often they use the internet for: sending emails, searching information, hobbies, educational purposes, online transactions and for participating in online forums (α = .62, M = 3.83, SD = .52). An index of the overall media use is constructed by combining all items from each dimension (α = .74, M = 3.21, SD = .46).
Results
To determine if social capital (bridging and bonding dimension), efficacy and self-consistency mediate the relationship between social media use and each dimension of civic engagement, mediation models were estimated with PROCESS (Hayes, 2013). This study has 12 mediation models. First, overall social media use as an independent variable and civic engagement as a dependent variable. As civic engagement is split into 3 dimensions (civic duty, civic skills, and civic participation), the model changed into 3 different mediation models with each dimension of civic engagement as a dependent variable. Second, type of social media use as an independent variable and civic engagement as a dependent variable. As type of social media use is split into 3 dimensions (active social media use in a public setting, active social media use in a private setting, and passive social media use) and civic engagement is split into 3 dimensions as well (civic duty, civic skills, and civic participation), the model changed into 9 different mediation models. Hence, the present study has 12 mediation models with 4 different independent variables and 3 dependent variables. Each model has the same mediators: bridging dimension of social capital, bonding dimension of social capital, self-efficacy, and self-consistency.
Overall social media use and civic duty
The first mediation model investigates the mediators of the effect of overall social media use on civic duty. Overall social media use as an independent variable and civic duty as a dependent variable. The model explains 33% in the dependent variable, R-Square = .33, F (10, 236) = 11.82, p < .001. Overall social media use does not predict civic duty, b = .07, t (240) = 1.67, p = .09. Therefore H1 is rejected. Overall social media use predicts bridging dimension of social capital (b = .20, t (240) = 3.94, p = .00) and predicts bonding dimension
.17** (H2b) .20** (H2a) .00 (H4b) .07 (H1) .12* (H2a) .05 (H2b) .20** (H4a) .06 (H3a) .27** (H3b)
of social capital (b = .12, t (240) = 2.00, p = .04). Therefore H2a is accepted. Bridging dimension of social capital predicts civic duty (b = .17, t (236) = 3.54, p = .00) whereas bonding dimension of social capital does not predict civic duty (b = .05, t (236) = 1.27, p = .20). Therefore H2b is partially accepted. Overall social media use does not predict Self-efficacy (b = .06, t (240) = 1.22, p = .22). Therefore H3a is rejected. Self-Self-efficacy predicts civic duty (b = .27, t (236) = 5.80, p = .00). Therefore H3b is accepted. Overall social media use predicts self-consistency (b = .20, t (240) = 4.02, p = .00). Therefore H4a is accepted. Self-consistency does not predict civic duty (b = -.00, t (236) = -.05, p = .95). Therefore H4b is rejected. The indirect effect of overall social media use on civic duty was tested using the bootstrap procedure (based on 5,000 bootstrap samples). The significant effect of overall social media use on the bridging dimension of social capital (H2a) and the significant effect of the bridging dimension of social capital on civic duty (H2b) indicate there is a mediation process. The result shows only the bridging dimension of social capital mediates the relationship between overall social media use and civic duty (b = .03; 95% bc CI: 0.01 to 0.07).
Figure 2. Model 1 of mediators of social media effect on civic duty. The figure displays unstandardized OLS regression coefficients. The higher numbers between social media use and mediators indicate the greater likelihood in social capital (SC), self-efficacy and self-consistency. The higher numbers between mediators and civic duty indicate the greater likelihood in civic duty. *p < .05; **p < .001.
SC bridging SC bonding Self-efficacy Self-consistency Overall social media use Civic duty
.02 (H2b) .31** (H3b) .01 (H4b) .03 (H1) .06 (H3a) .12* (H2a) .08 (H2b) .20** (H2a) .20** (H4a) .06 (H3a)
Overall social media use and civic skills (Model 2)
The second mediation model investigates which variables mediate the effect of overall social media use on civic skills. Overall social media use as an independent variable and civic skills as a dependent variable. Overall social media use does not predict civic skills, b = .03, t (240) = .58, p = .56. Therefore H1 is rejected. Bridging dimension of social capital does not predict civic skills (b = .08, t (236) = 1.13, p = .25) and the bonding dimension of social capital does not predict civic skills either (b = -.02, t (236) = -.37, p = .71). Therefore H2b is fully rejected. Self-efficacy predicts civic skills (b = .31, t (236) = 4.33, p = .00). Therefore H3b is accepted. Self-consistency does not predict civic skills (b = .01, t (236) = .23, p = .81). Therefore H4b is rejected. The indirect effect of overall social media use on civic skills was tested using the bootstrap procedure (based on 5,000 bootstrap samples). The result shows there is no significant mediating variable that mediates the relationship between overall social media use and civic skills.
Figure 3. Model 2 of mediators of social media effect on civic skills. The figure displays unstandardized OLS regression coefficients. The higher numbers between social media use and mediators indicate the greater likelihood in social capital (SC), self-efficacy and self-consistency. The higher numbers between mediators and civic skills indicate the greater likelihood in civic skills. *p < .05; **p < .001.
SC bridging SC bonding Self-efficacy Self-consistency Overall social media use Civic skills
.08 (H2b) .47** (H3b) .08 (H4b) .20** (H1) .06 (H3a) .12* (H2a) .01 (H2b) .20** (H2a) .20** (H4a)
Overall social media use and civic participation (Model 3)
The third mediation model investigates which variables mediate the effect of overall social media use on civic participation. Overall social media use as an independent variable and civic participation as a dependent variable. Overall social media use predicts civic participation, b = .20, t (240) = 3.09, p < .05. Therefore H1 is accepted. Bridging dimension of social capital does not predict civic participation (b = .01, t (236) = .13, p = .89) and the bonding dimension of social capital does not predict civic participation either (b = .08, t (236) = 1.19, p = .23). Therefore H2b is rejected. Self-efficacy predicts civic participation (b = .47, t (236) = 5.77, p = .00). Therefore H3b is accepted. Self-consistency does not predict civic participation (b = -.08, t (236) = -1.10, p = .27). Therefore H4b is rejected. The indirect effect of overall social media use on civic participation was tested using the bootstrap procedure (based on 5,000 bootstrap samples). The results show that there is no significant mediating variable that mediates the relationship between overall social media use and civic participation.
Figure 4. Model 3 of mediators of social media effect on civic participation. The figure displays unstandardized OLS regression coefficients. The higher numbers between social media use and mediators indicate the greater likelihood in social capital (SC), self-efficacy and self-consistency. The higher numbers between mediators and civic participation indicate the greater likelihood in civic participation. *p < .05; **p < .001. SC bridging SC bonding Self-efficacy Self-consistency Overall social media use Civic participation
Different effects by type of social media use on civic engagement
In this study, I also investigated if the effect by type of social media use on civic engagement is mediated by social capital (bridging and bonding dimension), self-efficacy, and self-efficacy. Additional models were estimated by specific types of social media use were included as independent variables and each dimension of civic engagement as dependent variables and social capital (bridging and bonding dimension), self-efficacy, and self-consistency as mediators.
Indirect effect by type of social media use on civic duty
Independent variables and mediators Effects b1 (X à M) b2 (M à Y) b1*b2 (indirect effect)
Coeff Corrected CI 95% Bias
Active public social media use SC bridging SC bonding Self-efficacy Self-consistency .09(.02)* .03(.53) .02(.50) .16(.00)** .17(.00)** .05(.17) .27(.00)** .00(.88) .01 -.00 .00 -.00 0.00 to 0.04* -0.01 to 0.01 -0.01 to 0.03 -0.01 to 0.01 Active private social media use
SC bridging SC bonding Self-efficacy Self-consistency .08(.01)* .10(.00)** .03(.30) .03(.23) .17(.00)** .04(.26) .28(.00)** .00(.93) .01 .00 .00 -.00 0.00 to 0.03* -0.00 to 0.02 -0.00 to 0.03 -0.00 to 0.00 Passive social media use
SC bridging SC bonding Self-efficacy Self-consistency .11(.00)** .09(.01)* .03(.36) .11(.00)** .19(.00)** .06(.15) .27(.00)** .01(.74) .02 .00 .00 .00 0.00 to 0.04* -0.00 to 0.02 -0.01 to 0.03 -0.00 to 0.01
Table 1. Indirect effect by type of social media use on civic duty. The table displays unstandardized OLS regression coefficients. Lower and upper bounds of bootstrapped (5000 samples) and bias corrected confidence intervals are displayed. A significant effect occurs when zero does not lie between the lower and upper bound of the interval. *p < .05; **p < .001.
The fourth mediation model investigates the mediators of the effect of active social media use in a public setting as an independent variable and civic duty as a dependent
variable. Active social media use in a public setting does not predict civic duty, b = .04, t (240) = 1.21, p = .22. Therefore H1 is rejected. Active social media use in public setting predicts bridging dimension of social capital (b = .09, t (240) = 2.27, p = .02) yet does not predict the bonding dimension of social capital (b = -.03, t (240) = -.61, p = .53). Therefore H2a is partially accepted. Bridging dimension of social capital predicts civic duty (b = .17, t (236) = 3.50, p = .00) whereas bonding dimension does not predict civic duty (b = .05, t (236) = 1.34, p = .17). Therefore H2b is partially accepted. Active social media use in a public setting does not predict Self-efficacy (b = .02, t (240) = .66, p = .50). Therefore H3a is rejected. Self-efficacy predicts civic duty (b = .27, t (236) = 5.79, p = .00). Therefore H3b is accepted. Active social media use in a public setting predicts self-consistency (b = .16, t (240) = 3.81, p = .00). Therefore H4a is accepted. Self-consistency does not predict civic duty (b = -.00, t (236) = -.14, p = .88). Therefore H4b is rejected.
The fifth mediation model investigates the mediators of the effect of active social media use in a private setting as an independent variable and civic duty as a dependent variable. Active social media use in private setting predicts civic duty, b = .05, t (240) = 2.27, p < .05. Therefore H1 is accepted. Active social media use in private setting predicts the bridging dimension of social capital (b = .08, t (240) = 2.58, p = .00) and predicts the bonding dimension of social capital as well (b = .10, t (240) = 2.84, p < .05). Therefore H2a is fully accepted. Bridging dimension of social capital predicts civic duty (b = .17, t (236) = 3.53, p = .00) whereas the bonding dimension does not predict civic duty (b = .04, t (236) = 1.10, p = .26). Therefore H2b is partially accepted. Active social media use in a private setting does not predict efficacy (b = .03, t (240) = 1.02, p = .30). Therefore H3a is rejected. Self-efficacy predicts civic duty (b = .28, t (236) = 5.87, p = .00). Therefore H3b is accepted. Active social media use in a private setting does not predict self-consistency (b = .03, t (240) = 1.20, p = .23). Therefore H4a is rejected. Selfconsistency does not predict civic duty (b = -.00, t (236) = -.07, p = .93). Therefore H4b is rejected.
The sixth mediation model investigates the mediators of the effect of passive social media use as an independent variable and civic duty as a dependent variable. Passive social media use does not predict civic duty, b = -.00, t (240) = -.05, p = .95. Therefore H1 is rejected. Passive social media use predicts bridging dimension of social capital (b = .11, t (240) = 3.40, p = .00) and predicts the bonding dimension of social capital as well (b = .09, t (240) = 2.35, p = .01). Therefore H2a is fully accepted. Bridging dimension of social capital predicts civic duty (b = .19, t (236) = 3.92, p = .00) whereas bonding dimension does not
predict civic duty (b = .06, t (236) = 1.42, p = .15). Therefore H2b is partially accepted. Passive social media use does not predict self-efficacy (b = .03, t (240) = .91, p = .36). Therefore H3a is rejected. Self-efficacy predicts civic duty (b = .27, t (236) = 5.71, p = .00). Therefore H3b is accepted. Passive social media use predicts self-consistency (b = .11, t (240) = 3.25, p = .00). Therefore H4a is accepted. Self-consistency does not predict civic duty (b = .01, t (236) = .32, p = .74). Therefore H4b is rejected.
The indirect effect of each type of social media use on civic duty was tested using the bootstrap procedure (based on 5,000 bootstrap samples). The results show that only the bridging dimension of social capital mediates the relationship between active social media use in a private setting and civic duty (b = .01; 95% bc CI: 0.00 to 0.03).
Indirect effect by type of social media use on civic skills
Independent variables and mediators Effects b1 (X à M) b2 (M à Y) b1*b2 (indirect effect)
Coeff Corrected CI 95% Bias
Active public social media use SC bridging SC bonding Self-efficacy Self-consistency .09(.02)* .03(.53) .02(.50) .16(.00)** .06(.35) .01(.82) .31(.00)** .00(.92) .00 .00 .00 -.00 -0.00 to 0.03 -0.00 to 0.01 -0.02 to 0.04 -0.02 to 0.01 Active private social media use
SC bridging SC bonding Self-efficacy Self-consistency .08(.01)* .10(.00)** .03(.30) .03(.23) .08(.24) .02(.74) .31(.00)** .01(.80) .00 -.00 .01 .00 -0.00 to 0.02 -0.02 to 0.01 -0.01 to 0.04 -0.00 to 0.01 Passive social media use
SC bridging SC bonding Self-efficacy Self-consistency .11(.00)** .09(.01)* .03(.36) .11(.00)** .10(.17) .01(.79) .30(.00)** .03(.62) .01 -.00 .01 .00 -0.00 to 0.03 -0.01 to 0.01 -0.01 to 0.03 -0.01 to 0.02
Table 2. Indirect effect by type of social media use on civic skills. The table displays unstandardized OLS regression coefficients. Lower and upper bounds of bootstrapped (5000 samples) and bias corrected confidence intervals are displayed. A significant effect occurs when zero does not lie between the lower and upper bound of the interval. *p < .05; **p < .001.
The seventh mediation model investigates the mediators of the effect of active social media use in a public setting as an independent variable and civic skills as a dependent variable. Active social media use in a public setting does not predict civic skills, b = .07, t (240) = 1.64, p = .10. Therefore H1 is rejected. Bridging dimension of social capital does not predict civic skills (b = .06, t (236) = .92, p = .35) and the bonding dimension of social capital does not predict civic skills either (b = -.01, t (236) = -.22, p = .82). Therefore H2b is fully rejected. Self-efficacy predicts civic skills (b = .31, t (236) = 4.34, p = .00). Therefore H3b is accepted. Self-consistency does not predict civic skills (b = -.00, t (236) = -.09, p = .92). Therefore H4b is rejected.
The eighth mediation model investigates the mediators of the effect of active social media use in a private setting as an independent variable and civic skills as a dependent variable. Active social media use in a private setting does not predict civic skills, b = .00, t (240) = .09, p = .92. Therefore H1 is rejected. Bridging dimension of social capital does not predict civic skills (b = .08, t (236) = 1.17, p = .24) and bonding dimension of social capital does not predict civic skills either (b = -.02, t (236) = -.32, p = .74). Therefore H2b is fully rejected. Self-efficacy predicts civic skills (b = .31, t (236) = 4.32, p = .00). Therefore H3b is accepted. Self-consistency does not predict civic skills (b = .01, t (236) = .24, p = .80). Therefore H4b is rejected.
The ninth mediation model investigates the mediators of the effect of passive social media use as an independent variable and civic skills as a dependent variable. Passive social media use does not predict civic skills, b = -.02, t (240) = -.74, p = .45. Therefore H1 is rejected. Bridging dimension of social capital does not predict civic skills (b = .10, t (236) = 1.36, p = .17) and the bonding dimension of social capital does not predict civic skills either (b = -.01, t (236) = -.26, p = .79). Therefore H2b is fully rejected. Self-efficacy predicts civic skills (b = .30, t (236) = 4.26, p = .00). Therefore H3b is accepted. Self-consistency does not predict civic skills (b = .03, t (236) = .48, p = .62). Therefore H4b is rejected.
The indirect effect of each type of social media use on civic skills was tested using the bootstrap procedure (based on 5,000 bootstrap samples). The results show there is no significant mediating variable that mediates the relationship between all types of social media use and civic skills.
Indirect effect by type of social media use on civic participation Independent variables and mediators Effects b1 (X à M) b2 (M à Y) b1*b2 (indirect effect)
Coeff Corrected CI 95% Bias
Active public social media use SC bridging SC bonding Self-efficacy Self-consistency .09(.02)* .03(.53) .02(.50) .16(.00)** .00(.96) .13(.06) .45(.00)** .10(.14) .00 -.00 .01 -.01 -0.01 to 0.01 -0.02 to 0.01 -0.03 to 0.05 -0.04 to 0.01 Active private social media use
SC bridging SC bonding Self-efficacy Self-consistency .08(.01)* .10(.00)** .03(.30) .03(.23) .04(.56) .08(.27) .46(.00)** .04(.59) .00 -.00 .01 -.00 -0.00 to 0.02 -0.00 to 0.03 -0.01 to 0.05 -0.01 to 0.01 Passive social media use
SC bridging SC bonding Self-efficacy Self-consistency .11(.00)** .09(.01)* .03(.36) .11(.00)** .06(.44) .09(.19) .46(.00)** .02(.71) .00 .00 .01 -.00 -0.00 to 0.03 -0.00 to 0.03 -0.01 to 0.05 -0.02 to 0.01
Table 3. Indirect effect by type of social media use on civic participation. The table displays unstandardized OLS regression coefficients. Lower and upper bounds of bootstrapped (5000 samples) and bias corrected confidence intervals are displayed. A significant effect occurs when zero does not lie between the lower and upper bound of the interval. *p < .05; **p < .001.
The tenth mediation model investigates the mediators of the effect of active social media use in a public setting as an independent variable and civic participation as a dependent variable. Active social media use in a public setting predicts civic participation, b = .21, t (240) = 3.94, p < .001. Therefore H1 is accepted. Bridging dimension of social capital does not predict civic participation (b = .00, t (236) = .04, p = .96) and the bonding dimension of social capital does not predict civic participation either (b = .13, t (236) = 1.82, p = .06). Therefore H2b is fully rejected. Self-efficacy predicts civic participation (b = .45, t (236) = 5.74, p = .00). Therefore H3b is accepted. Self-consistency does not predict civic participation (b = -.10, t (236) = -1.46, p = .14). Therefore H4b is rejected.
The eleventh mediation model investigates the mediators of the effect of active social media use in a private setting as an independent variable and civic participation as a
dependent variable. Active social media use in a private setting does not predict civic participation, b = .08, t (240) = 1.93, p = .053. Therefore H1 is rejected. Bridging dimension of social capital does not predict civic participation (b = .04, t (236) = .57, p = .56) and bonding dimension of social capital does not predict civic participation either (b = .08, t (236) = 1.09, p = .27). Therefore H2b is fully rejected. Self-efficacy predicts civic participation (b = .46, t (236) = 5.65, p = .00). Therefore H3b is accepted. Self-consistency does not predict civic participation (b = -.04, t (236) = -.53, p = .59). Therefore H4b is rejected.
The twelfth mediation model investigates the mediators of the effect of passive social media use as an independent variable and civic participation as a dependent variable. Passive social media use does not predict civic participation, b = .01, t (240) = .27, p = .78. Therefore H1 is rejected. Bridging dimension of social capital does not predict civic participation (b = .06, t (236) = .77, p = .44) and the bonding dimension of social capital does not predict civic participation either (b = .09, t (236) = 1.30, p = .19). Therefore H2b is fully rejected. Self-efficacy predicts civic participation (b = .46, t (236) = 5.53, p = .00). Therefore H3b is accepted. Self-consistency does not predict civic participation (b = -.02, t (236) = -.36, p = .71). Therefore H4b is rejected.
The indirect effect of each type of social media use on civic participation was tested using the bootstrap procedure (based on 5,000 bootstrap samples). The results show that there is no significant mediating variable that mediates the relationship between all types of social media use and civic participation.
Control variables
The effect of control variables on the basis of the relationship between overall social media use and civic engagement was estimated in the mediation model. The control variables are overall media use, gender, age, income and education. In the first model where overall social media use as an independent variable and civic duty as a dependent variable, only overall media use has a significant effect on civic duty (b = .17, t (240) = 3.28, p < .001). In the second model where overall social media use as an independent variable and civic skills as a dependent variable, overall media use (b = .36, t (240) = 5.07, p < .001) and income (b = -.06, t (240) = -2.20 p < .05) significantly predict civic skills. In the third model where overall social media use as an independent variable and civic participation as a dependent variable, only overall media use (b = .47, t (240) = 5.62, p < .05) and education (b = .12, t (240) = 2.66, p < .05) significantly predict civic participation.
Discussion
The aim of the study is to investigate whether psychological mechanisms such as social capital, self-efficacy, and self-consistency mediate the relationship between social media use and civic engagement among emerging adults. The results consist of 2 analyses: the effect of overall social media use on civic engagement and the effect of the types of social media use on civic engagement. The first analysis has 3 mediation models where overall social media use as an independent variable and each dimension of civic engagement as a dependent variable. The results of the first analysis showed that overall social media use does not predict either civic duty nor civic skills yet does predict civic participation. The analysis also demonstrates that the bridging dimension of social capital mediates the relationship between overall social media use and civic duty, whereas there is no significant mediator that mediates the relationship between overall social media use and civic participation.
In the second analysis, 3 types of social media use as independent variables (active social media use in a public setting, active social media use in a private setting, and passive social media use) and 3 dimensions of civic engagement as dependent variables (civic duty, civic skills, and civic participation). Thus, the second analysis has 9 mediation models. Firstly, neither active social media use in a public setting nor passive social media use predicts civic duty. However, active social media use in a private setting significantly predicts civic duty. The bridging dimension of social capital is a significant mediator of the relationship between active social media use in a private setting and civic duty. Secondly, all three types of social media use do not predict civic skills. Thirdly, only active social media use in a public setting significantly predicts civic participation. There is no statistically significant mediator that mediates the relationship between each type of social media use and civic participation.
The findings of the study support previous studies specifically that contributes to the degree to which the type of social media influences the specific dimensions of civic engagement. The results show that different type of social media use has different effect on civic duty and civic participation. Only active social media use in a private setting influences how emerging adults perceive the importance of civic engagement and only active social media use in a public setting significantly predict the level of civic participation among emerging adults. The findings of two analyses support the argument of Bobek et al. (2009) that suggest it is important to investigate civic engagement in three different dimensions that
measure emotions, cognitions, and behavior of an individual. The result of the first analysis suggests that the effect of social media use on specific dimension of civic engagement is different from each other. Being engaged and getting involved in civic activities does not mean that one has a strong civic duty or high civic skills. One of the explanations why emerging adults have less emotion when it comes to civic issues on social media is self-focused. Arnett (2000) mentioned that emerging adulthood is the period when an individual focuses on him/herself in terms of what to do and what to expect in life. Every action refers to “what’s in it for me?”
Self-focus in emerging adulthood’s context means emerging adults base their action on their personal needs. It might appear selfish, but the frequency of online interaction on social media lead emerging adults to focus more on their personal relationships rather than focus on public affairs. Another reason why having more online interaction on social media may influence an individual to have less emotion for civic issues is due to the fact that emerging adults use social media to explore their identity (Coyne et al., 2013). Focusing on “what’s in it for me?” on social media may lead them to build their online presence rather than to think and concern on other’s lives or public issues.
Additional explanation is due to the fact that in all mediation models, overall media use has more significant effect on civic duty rather than social media use. In every model, the results show that overall media use is the most influential control variable and has the largest effect on how emerging adults perceive civic engagement. Therefore, when it comes to information of public affairs and civic issues, emerging adults are more likely to refer to the traditional media instead of social media. This finding supports previous studies that argue using media for information increased the individual-level production of social participation (McLeod et al., 1999; Shah, 1998; Zhang & Chia, 2006). The finding of the present study shows that searching information about public affairs on television, newspaper, radio or Internet in general influence how emerging adults perceive the importance of civic engagement. Hence, different type of media use among emerging adults reflects how diverse their media preferences are (Coyne et al., 2013). Emerging adults use social media as the main information of civic issues and refer to the traditional media to validate this information.
However, in the second analysis, the results show different findings on the effect of social media use on civic duty. Out of three types of social media use, only active social media use in a private setting significantly predicts civic duty. This means activities on social
media that allow online interaction between the users in a private setting influence how an individual perceive the importance of civic issues. Helping people, poverty eradication, and other civic issues are perceived as important issues when it comes to the online interaction in a private setting. One of the reasons is due to the fact that emerging adults who frequently use social media have a strong social connection within their social networks (Williams, 2006). The finding shows that the bridging dimension of social capital is a significant mediator of the relationship between active social media use in a private setting and civic duty. The frequency of social media use in a private setting increases the likelihood in civic duty by increasing the bridging dimension of social capital. This finding supports a previous study that suggests higher civic engagement occurs among individuals who have larger networks than those who have smaller networks (Gil de Zuniga & Valenzuela, 2011). Emerging adults perceive civic issues and public affairs as important issues when it comes to online interaction with their acquaintances.
In relation to civic participation, the current study also supports previous studies that suggest using social media for information contributes to civic behaviors (Gil de Zuniga & Valenzuela, 2011; Leighley, 1990; McLeod, Scheufele, & Moy, 1999). The result shows not only overall social media use but also specifically active social media use in a public setting significantly predicts civic participation. One of the explanations is due to the fact that emerging adults who frequently use social media are more likely to change their behaviors when adjusting to what is performed publicly rather than privately (Tice, 1992). Public pressure on social media leads them to live up their online presence in real life when it comes to civic issues. The more they are aware of their “publicness” on social media, the more likely they act and behave in accordance with social norms (Tice, 1992).
There is no significant mediators that mediate the relationship between overall social media use and civic participation as well as between active social media use in a public setting and civic participation prove that social media use plays an important role in how individuals participate in civic activities. Getting involved in civic activities does not necessarily mean that they consider the importance of the contribution to the community. There are several motivations underlying such behaviors such as “self-concept” in a public setting (Kelly & Rodriguez, 2006; Tice, 1992; Schlenker, Dlugolecki, & Doherty, 1994). In this study, social capital, self-efficacy and self-consistency are not significant mediators of the relationship between social media use and civic participation. Future research therefore could investigate other variables such as self-motivation and self-representation.
There are some limitations that need to be addressed. Firstly, the study only focuses on three mediators. When it comes to study about the psychological mechanisms, there are many other variables that might mediate the relationship between social media use and civic engagement. Future studies can be conducted to investigate other variables such as online self-representation and self-motivation. Secondly, the present study used convenience sampling method in which only Facebook and Twitter was used to spread the link of online questionnaire. As social media has other platforms such as Linked In, Google Plus, and Path, future research could utilize other social media platforms. Thirdly, each type of social media use was measured by 2 items that might not provide deeper information about activities on social media. Future research could explore more precise measurement such as the frequency of comments, the frequency of sending friend requests, the frequency of newsfeed reading, the frequency of sharing information about public affairs, and the frequency of posting in specific online forum such as a Facebook group.
In conclusion, this study contributes to the previous studies that focus on social media effect on civic engagement among emerging adults. Specifically, the study adds to the exploratory researches which investigate psychological mechanisms between social media use and civic engagement. The present study gives a comprehensive understanding of the impact of a specific type of social media use on a specific dimension of civic engagement. Active social media use in a private setting influences civic duty and active media use in a public setting influences civic participation. As the study only focuses on three mediators, future research could therefore explore other psychological mechanisms that may mediate the relationship between social media use and civic engagement such as online self-representation and self-motivation.
References
Arnett, J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 465-480.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of personality. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 154-196). New York: The Guilford Press.
Bargh, J. A., McKenna, K. Y. A., & Fitzsimons, G. M. (2002). Can you see the real me? Activation and expression of the ‘‘true self’’ on the Internet. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 33–48.
Bobek, D. L., Zaff, J. F., Li, Y., & Lerner, R. M. (2009). Cognitive, emotional, and behavioral components of civic action: Towards an integrated measure of civic engagement. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(5), 615-627.
Burke, M., Kraut, R., & Marlow, C. (2011). Social capital on facebook: Differentiating uses and users. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vancouver, Canada, 571–580.
Cialdini, R. B., Trost, M. R., & Newsom, J. T. (1995). Preference for consistency: The development of a valid measure and the discovery of surprise implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 318–328.
Coyne, S. M., Padilla-Waker, L. M., Howard, E. (2013). Emerging in a digital world: A decade review of media use, effects, and gratifications in emerging adulthood. Emerging Adulthood, 1, 125-317.
Diller, E. C. (2001). Citizens in service: The challenge of delivering civic engagement training to national service programs. Washington DC: Corporation for National and Community Service.
Ellison, N., Heino, R., & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing impressions online: Self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2).
Frison, E., & Eggermont, S. (2015). Exploring the relationships between different types of facebook use, perceived online social support, and adolescents’ depressed mood. Social Science Computer Review, 1-19.
Gil de Zuniga, H., & Valenzuela, S. (2011). The mediating path to a stronger citizenship: Online and offline networks, weak ties, and civic engagement. Communication Research, 38(3), 397-421.
Gil de Zuniga, H., Jung, N., & Valenzuela, S. (2012). Social media use for news and individuals’ social capital, civic engagement and political participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17, 319–336.
Gilbert, E., & Karahalios, K. (2009). Predicting tie strength with social media. Paper presented at the CHI, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Hocevar, K.P., Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger., M., J. (2014). Social media self-efficacy and information evaluation online. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 254–262.
Howard, P. N., & Parks, M. R. (2012). Social media and political change: Capacity, constraint, and consequence. Journal of Communication, 62, 359–362.
Kelly, A. E., & Rodriguez, R. R. (2006). Publicly committing oneself to an identity. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 28, 185–191.
Khan, U., & Dhar, R. (2007) Where there is a way, there is a will? The effect of future choices on self-control. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 136, 277–288. Kim, Y. C., & Ball-Rokeach, S. J. (2006). Neighborhood storytelling resources and civic
engagement: A multileple approach. Human Communication Research, 32(4), 411-439. Lasorsa, D. L. (1991). Political outspokenness: Factors working against the spiral of
silence. Journalism Quarterly, 68 (1/2), 131-139.
Leighley, J. E. (1990). Social interaction and contextual influences on political participation. American Politics Research, 18, 459–475.
Matei, S., & Ball-Rokeach, S. (2003). The Internet in the communication infrastructure of urban residential communities: Macro or mesolinkage? Communication Research, 642-657.
Mazar, N., & Zhong, C. B. (2010). Do green products make us better people? Psychological Science, 21, 494– 498.
McLeod, J. M., Scheufele, D. A., & Moy, P. (1999). Community, communication, and participation: The role of mass media and interpersonal discussion in local political participation. Political Communication, 16, 315–336.
Newby-Clark, I. R., McGregor, I., & Zanna, M. P. (2002). Thinking and caring about cognitive inconsistency: When and for whom does attitudinal ambivalence feel uncomfortable? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 157–166.
Oswald, D. L., Clark, E. M., & Kelly, C. M. (2004). Friendship maintenance: An analysis of individual and dyad behaviors. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23(3), 413-441.
Portney, K. E., Eichenberg, R. C., & Niemi, R. G. (2009). Gender differences in political and civic engagement among young people. Paper presented at the American Political Science. Association, Toronto, Canada.
