Graduate School of Communication Entertainment Communication
Master Thesis
Influencers on a digital detox
The relation between social media disconnection, influencers’ self-esteem and
life satisfaction, and the mediating role of perceived stress and positive feedback
Author: Petra Zelinková ID: 12845949
Supervisor: dhr. prof. dr. Jochen Peter Date: 26th June 2020
Abstract
Current society faces a problem of overusing social networks and becoming dependent on them resulting in several issues for the users. As a result, a new phenomenon has emerged. Users began to take temporary breaks from social media. There is a lack of research in this field, therefore the goal of the presented study was to bring new insights and shed light on consequences of social media disconnection on a specific group of influential users who are heavily on social media. These users are possibly dependent on social media and also use social media differently than regular users. The study aimed to examine the influence of social media disconnection on influencers’ self-esteem and life satisfaction and the mediation role of perceived stress and positive feedback. As a part of this thesis, an online survey was conducted. This survey succeeded in obtaining answers from a notoriously difficult to reach sample (N = 155). Results showed no significant relations between social media
disconnection, self-esteem and life satisfaction. Hypotheses about a mediation role of perceived stress and positive feedback were not supported. A significant relationship was found between social media disconnection and positive feedback as well as between perceived stress and life satisfaction. Findings suggest that users who are heavily active on social media and probably dependent on them do not benefit from going on a break in terms of self-esteem and life-satisfaction. Results imply that influencers have found their ways using social media and feeling well and satisfied even though they are most likely heavy users dependent on social media.
Keywords: influencers, social media disconnection, self-esteem, life satisfaction, perceived stress, feedback
Introduction
Social media have become a substantive part of everyday routine for many people and play an important role in people’s lives and in today’s society. Social media can be beneficial to society but also have negative effects on everyday life. People spend a lot of time on social media. U.S. adults devote 33% of their time spent online to using social media. That means, they devote about 2.15 hours to social media daily (Childers, Lemon, & Hoy, 2019).
Adolescents spend even more time online. They devote approximately nine hours of their time to online activities daily (Rushton, 2019). The society faces a problem of using social networks excessively and becoming dependent on them (Wang, Lee, & Hua, 2015). Overuse of social media and digital technologies can bring several problems (Montag & Walla, 2016). It is associated with depression (Baker & Algorta, 2016; Kraut et al., 1998) and restricted social interaction (Kraut et al., 1998). It negatively affects life satisfaction and well-being (Kraut et al., 1998; Marino, Gini, Vieno, & Spada, 2018; Vogel, Rose, Roberts, & Eckles, 2014), self-esteem (Andreassen, Pallesen & Griffiths, 2017; Malik & Khan, 2015) It is also linked with stress (Brooks, 2015; Samaha & Hawi, 2016; Tams, Legoux, & Léger, 2018).
Potential overuse of social media worries users, so they try to find ways to avoid it and improve their online time management. Some of them take breaks from using social networks or reduce time spent online. Researchers have begun to explore this new phenomenon in social media use (e.g., Hunt, Marx, Lipson, & Young, 2018; Tromholt, 2016; Schoenebeck, 2014b) and found mixed effects of social media disconnection. Some research looks at using social media as a habit and disconnection as breaking this habit that can be uneasy and stressful (Schoenebeck, 2014a). Stress can be also caused by experiencing higher level of the fear-of-missing-out (Przybylski, Murayama, DeHaan, & Gladwell, 2013; Turel, Cavagnaro, & Meshi, 2018) or being socially isolated (Turel et al., 2018). Nevertheless, previous research also showed that disconnection has beneficial effects on our lives. The break from social
media may diminish stress (Turel et al., 2018), improve life satisfaction (Hinsch & Sheldon, 2013) and enhance well-being (Tromholt, 2016). Reducing time spent on social media can enable users to engage in other activities (Turel et al., 2018) and diminish a level of feeling depressed and lonely which can result in the well-being improvement (Hunt et al., 2018). Users who are prone to use social media excessively can benefit more from disconnection (Tromholt, 2016; Turel et al., 2018). According to a recent study (Influencer Agency, 2019), influencers spend 9 hours per day on their phones using social media. Additionally, they have a lot of followers and the larger the number of followers on one's Instagram, the higher is the level of dependence to a social media platform (Köse & Doğan, 2019). Due to the specifics of this group, it can be assumed that they are susceptible to social media overuse and to be heavy social media users.
Previous research examining the impact of social media use and non-use on people's lives has so far focused only on ordinary users of social media. No research has been
conducted to study specific groups of social media users such as influencers. They are opinion leaders and online creators followed by thousands or millions of social media users who are being influenced by them (Uzunoğlu & Misci Kip, 2014). Influencers usually receive a considerable amount of likes and comments from their followers who have para-social relationships with them (Frederick, Lim, Clavio, & Walsh, 2012; Perse & Rubin, 1989), trust them and follow their recommendations (Chen, 2018; Lim, Radzol, Cheah, & Wong, 2017). Therefore, influencers have become a strong trend in marketing communication in recent years (Harrison, 2017) and many companies collaborate with them mostly through their social media accounts to promote their services or products (Abidin, 2016; de Veirman, Cauberghe, & Hudders, 2017). Social media use has become a source of income and a job for many influencers (Lin, Bruning & Swarna, 2018). Mentioned characteristics makes influencers different from regular users.
As previously mentioned, research showed that disconnection can improve life satisfaction. Hinsch and Sheldon (2013) found that reduction of social media use can cause increasement in life satisfaction through a lower level of procrastination. Nevertheless, influencers work on social media and create content for their followers. It suggests they do not procrastinate on social media as much as regular users. By comparing online and offline activity on social media, another study (Sagioglou & Greitemeyer, 2014) showed social media decrease mood because users consider social media use to be a meaningless activity.
However, influencers use social media to build relationships with a substantial number of followers and to entertain, inspire or educate them through their online content which they probably regard as meaningful activities. By studying influencers, the study can enrich the existing theory of overuse and disconnection with insights into how perhaps dependent users who overuse social media to work there and engage in activities they possibly consider to be meaningful can benefit from disconnection. In addition, the main focus of influencers’ activity on social media are activities such as looking at their own profiles, editing them, building relationships with followers and receiving feedback from them. All mentioned activities can be boosters of users’ self-esteem (Burrow & Rainone, 2017; Gonzales & Hancock, 2011; Wilcox & Stephen, 2013). However, during the break from social media, influencers do not engage in those activities that can boost their self-esteem. There is a lack of research about the relation among disconnection and self-esteem and this study can bring findings about users for whom social media are likely to be important boosters of their self-esteem.
Taking into account the above, it is relevant to ask: What is the influence of social media disconnection on influencers’ self-esteem and life satisfaction?
By focusing on this specific group, the study can bring new insights into the growing body of theory and empirical work about the influence of disconnection from social media
platforms on users’ lives. The study can also provide findings that can be beneficial for potential improvements of influencers’ online time management.
Theoretical Framework Disconnection from social media
For better understanding of the concept of social media disconnection among
influencers and its impacts on their lives, it is important to better understand how influencers use social media and what type of users they are. Influencers usually spend around 9 hours per day on their phones using social media (Influencer Agency, 2019). This implies they are susceptible to social media overuse and to being heavy social media users. Additionally, they are followed by a large number of followers. Research shows that the larger number of
followers on Instagram one has, the higher a level of dependence to a social media platform is (Köse & Doğan, 2019). This may be an indication of influencers being more prone to social media dependence than regular users with a lower number of followers.
Kim and Jung (2017) propounded the concept of social media dependency that develops the concept from the media system dependency theory (Ball-Rokeach & DeFleur, 1976). There are reciprocal relationships between social systems, people and media. Users can be dependent on media as well as media can be dependent on users. In the theory, dependency is explained as a link between satisfying needs by media use and importance of media in one’s life. The more one is dependent on media to satisfy own needs, the more important role media will play in one’s life. Subsequently, the more media satisfy users’ needs, the more they use them. Excessive social media use creates a dependent relation with media (Kim & Jung, 2017). Many influencers work on social media and it is their source of income. They create own content for their followers, communicate with them or they may as well use social media to gain popularity or get inspiration for further content production. This means social media can satisfy various needs of influencers. Moreover, it is known that
influencers spend a considerable amount of time on social media (Influencer Agency, 2019). The above suggests influencers are heavy users and perhaps dependent on social media.
There is a lack of research about influencers. The theoretical and empirical framework for the social media disconnection is not extensive enough and it is still growing. The theory frames the thesis and helps to surmise what kind of users they are, how they use social media and how social media might affect them. This is essential for hypothesizing the influence of disconnection on influencers’ lives.
Dependency on social media and overuse may have bad consequences, for instance social media dependency and the digital overload are associated with a higher level of technostress (Brooks, 2015; Brooks, Schneider, & Wang, 2016). Disconnection can bring relief and gratification. Hinsch and Sheldon (2013) even found that heavy users who use social media excessively are more likely to strive to disconnect from social media or reduce their time spent online than moderate users are. However, users dependent on the use of social media can be hardly able to disconnect from social media platforms (Wang et al., 2015). When they are disconnected, the effects appear to be comparable to effects of abstinence among people with addictions (Stieger & Lewetz, 2018). Nonetheless, research also showed that users who are prone to social media dependency may benefit more from social media disconnection (Tromholt, 2016; Turel et al., 2018).
Users take breaks unintentionally (e.g., no Internet connection, loss of smartphone (Hoffner, Lee, & Park, 2016)) and intentionally, for different reasons such as perception of social media overuse, privacy reasons, constant disturbance from work and other activities. They may also consciously want to improve online time management or decrease technostress (Maier, Laumer, Eckhardt & Weitzel, 2015; Stieger & Lewetz, 2018). People either leave social media permanently, for instance as their lifestyle choice, or take a temporary break from social media use (Schoenebeck, 2014b). This study examines the second variant, the
temporary and intentional as well as unintentional social media disconnection. We can encounter different terms for this phenomenon in mass media, such as “digital detox” or “social media detox” (Barr, 2019; Eldor, 2018), that accredits stress reduction, well-being improvements and other benefits to breaks from social media use. During the complete disconnection examined in this study, users do not use social media at all, meaning they are temporarily not exposed to any impacts of social media use. This study examines the
relationship between social media disconnection, self-esteem and life satisfaction which will be argued below.
Self-esteem
Self-esteem can express how one subjectively evaluates himself or herself and how much one believes in own worth (Malik & Khan, 2015; Wilson, Fornasier, & White, 2010). There is a lack of research exploring the link between disconnection from social media and self-esteem, therefore it is necessary for the purpose of this study to focus on previous research that found there is a relationship between social media use and self-esteem. However, studies brought mixed results about this relationship (e.g., Gonzales & Hancock, 2011; Kalpidou, Costin, & Morris, 2011; Mehdizadeh, 2010; Vogel et al., 2014; Wilcox & Stephen, 2013). Some studies revealed negative effects of social media use on self-esteem (Kalpidou et al., 2011; Vogel et al., 2014). For instance, social media dependence may be a result or a predictor of decreased self-esteem (Andreassen et al., 2017). Addiction can be triggered by a misapprehension of users that the higher number of likes and followers one has, the more popular one is. It may result in problematic social media use in order to gather likes and followers (Köse & Doğan, 2019) and increase self-esteem (Andreassen et al., 2017). Nevertheless, when those excessive users face reality as it is possible for example during the break from social media it may diminish their self-esteem (Köse & Doğan, 2019).
As previously mentioned, one of the main goals of this study is to explore how disconnection from social media influences self-esteem of influencers. Exploration of this relationship was also based on the sociometer theory which affirms that self-esteem is determined by relational value that an individual perceives, and it is influenced by a level of one’s acceptance by others (Leary, 2005; Leary & Baumeister, 2000; Leary & Downs, 1995; Leary, Tambor, Terdal, & Downs, 1995). Perception of an individual’s relational value expresses how individuals feel about themselves and it can be enhanced when they feel accepted by others (Burrow & Rainone, 2016; Leary et al., 1995; Reitz, Motti-Stefandi, & Asendorpf, 2015). In the environment of social media, users are allowed to provide feedback to other users. Their feedback can be perceived as a signal of acceptance and it can increase one’s self-esteem (Burrow & Rainone, 2016). Both, feedback and acceptance by the online community are important elements of social media use (Valkenburg, Peter, & Schouten, 2006).
It is typical for influencers they get more feedback than ordinary users on social media. This specific group of users receives a considerable amount of feedback from social media users every day. Their followers provide them constant online feedback by following their profiles, liking, commenting, or sharing their content so it can reach more people. These supportive interactions on social media can be linked to self-esteem. Findings of prior studies showed that positive feedback from friends on social media can enhance self-esteem and satisfy psychological needs (Burrow & Rainone, 2017; Greitemeyer, Mügge, & Bollermann, 2014; Valkenburg et al., 2006). Influencers get thousands of likes and comments on their social media posts daily. Research found the number of virtual likes affects self-esteem (Burrow & Rainone, 2017; Jong & Drummond, 2016; Pounders, Kowalczyk, & Stowers, 2016). As Burrow & Rainone (2017) explain, more likes predict better self-esteem. It follows that positive reactions from other social media users enhance how people feel about
themselves, on the other hand negative reactions decrease self-esteem (Jong & Drummond, 2016; Valkenburg et al., 2006). However, social media platforms support more prosocial behavior and positive interactions, for instance by offering a “like” option and not a “dislike” option. Thus, it can be assumed that influencers mostly receive more positive feedback rather than negative feedback. Influencers are followed by thousands or millions of social media users. A number of followers or friends is also considered a form of feedback as well as likes and comments (Chua & Chang, 2016). Greitemeyer et al. (2014) found that having friends on social media that respond and react to one’s content is more important to satisfaction of the need to keep high self-esteem than a number of online friends. Based on previous research and literature we deduce that received feedback is important for influencers’ self-esteem, thus influencers can miss the positive feedback during the break. It can be assumed that during the period when influencers take the complete break from social media use, they receive
considerably less feedback in their lives than when they actively use social media. It is possible this may decrease their self-esteem during the break from social media. Therefore, the study examines a mediation role of feedback on the relation among disconnection and self-esteem.
For influencers, it is also important to be in touch with their followers and maintain strong ties with them. It was found that social media can increase self-esteem of users who concentrate their efforts on maintaining strong relationships with others when they use social media (Wilcox & Stephen, 2013). Positive presentation on social media can boost self-esteem as well, specifically when users take a look at their social media profiles and edit them (Gentile, Twenge, Freeman, & Campbell, 2012; Gonzales & Hancock, 2011). It can be
explained by the fact that these activities can put users in mind of what they can be proud of, for instance their following base. There is an association between pride and self-esteem (Gentile et al., 2012; Tracy, Cheng, Robins, & Trzesniewski, 2009). Mentioned activities like
looking at own profiles and editing them as well as building relationships with followers are the main focus of influencers’ activity on social media and can boost their self-esteem. However, during the break from social media, influencers do not engage in those activities. It can be assumed the break may negatively influence their self-esteem because those boosters of self-esteem which are present when influencers are connected, are not present during the break, and so influencers are not able to satisfy their need to keep high self-esteem through social media.
Following the outcomes of literature review above, we set those particular hypotheses: H1: There is a negative relationship between social media disconnection and
influencers’ self- esteem.
H2a: Influencers disconnected from social media receive less positive feedback than influencers connected to social media.
H2b: The less amount of positive feedback influencers receive during social media disconnection results in less self-esteem for influencers.
Life satisfaction
Life satisfaction expresses a subjective evaluation that indicates the extent to which one is satisfied with own life and how one subjectively judges a quality of own life (Diener, Emmons, Larson, & Griffin, 1985). People are incessantly striving for the greatest possible well-being and the highest possible quality of their lives. Nowadays, modern technology and social media have considerably changed users’ lifestyle. It may result in a change of their perceptions of quality of life and the subjective evaluation of their own lives (Zhan, Sun, Wang, & Zhang, 2016). Studies (e.g., Kross et al., 2013; Oh, Ozkaya, & LaRose, 2014; Valenzuela, Park, & Kee, 2009; Zhan et al., 2016) revealed that social network use affects life satisfaction of its users. Research also showed users’ satisfaction with their lives can be
improved by limiting use of social media (e.g., Brailovskaia, Ströse, Schillack, & Margraf, 2020; Hinsch & Sheldon, 2013).
Environment of social media provides propitious conditions for social comparison that can result in negative effects on self-perception, self-assessment and a subjective evaluation of one’s life (De Vries & Kühne, 2015; Frison & Eggermont, 2016; Vogel et al., 2014). Users that are more oriented to social comparison and sense a strong support on social media are more prone to social media dependency (Burnell & Kuther, 2016). Disconnection from social media may diminish social comparison (Turel et al., 2018). Tromholt (2016) brought findings that users who had been disconnected from social media for one week showed enhanced well-being unlike users that had stayed connected to social media. The week-long break from social media brought more positive emotions and caused enhanced life satisfaction. This effect was stronger for heavy users. Influencers may belong among heavy users as previously mentioned. The positive effect of reducing social media use on users’ well-being was also confirmed by findings from Hunt and colleagues (2018) that added users feel paradoxically less lonely and depressed during the period of limiting social media use. Hinsch and Sheldon (2013) also found that reduction of social media use can cause increasement of life
satisfaction. Comparing activity and no activity on social media, Sagioglou and Greitemeyer (2014) claim that social media use may have a negative effect on users’ mood. Disconnection also enables users to engage more in meaningful and pleasant activities (Turel et al., 2018). These effects may positively influence users’ life satisfaction during disconnection.
Not much is known about what may underlie a potential relation between
disconnection and life satisfaction. Perceived stress may play a mediation role in this relation. However, research brought mixed findings about perceived stress during disconnection. As previously mentioned, disconnection can be stressful for users. Stress can be caused by breaking a habit of social media use (Schoenebeck, 2014a), being socially isolated (Turel et
al., 2018), experiencing higher level of fear-of-missing-out (Przybylski et al., 2013; Turel et al., 2018) or having withdrawal symptoms in the case of dependent users (Samaha & Hawi, 2016; Turel et al., 2018).
On the other hand, research found that social media use can increase a level of
perceived stress (Brooks, 2015; Brooks et al., 2016, Fox & Moreland, 2015; Samaha & Hawi, 2016; Tams et al., 2018) and temporary disconnection from social media can reduce stress users perceive (Turel et al., 2018; Vanman, Baker, & Tobin, 2018) as well as fear-of-missing-out (Hunt et al., 2018). Turel et al. (2018) found that disconnection for several days has positive effects on stress reduction among typical social media users as well as users showing problematic social media use. Nevertheless, excessive users seem to benefit more from disconnection than typical users, and influencers may belong among excessive users. Not much is known about influencers, but it is known for sure they have a considerable number of followers and many influencers use social media as a channel for work. On social networks, users are incessantly forced to invest effort and time in keeping strong relationships which can become a stressor (Fox & Moreland, 2015). Influencers invest a lot of time to keep strong ties with a large base of followers which may stress them. Disconnection may decrease stress because it enables users to cut down the investment (Turel et al., 2018). Social media use is an integral part of a job for many influencers (Lin et al., 2018). Thus, they may experience job stress during social media use and disconnection can serve as a break from work. The main essence of activity on social media is interaction with others that can lead to communication overload that may bring about stress (Chen & Lee, 2013). It follows, influencers who interact with thousands or millions of followers on a daily basis can experience stressful
communication overload. Social comparison on social media can be also stressful for users (Fox & Moreland, 2015). It is not possible to engage in social comparison on social media or communicate online with others constantly while the user is taking a break from social media
which may result in reduction of perceived stress. It follows from the above, influencers may perceive less stress during disconnection than they would when they are connected. Research (e.g., Abolghasemi &Varaniyab, 2010; Coffman & Gilligan, 2002; Matheny, Roque Tovar, & Curlette, 2008) confirms that perceived stress predicts life satisfaction in the sense that a decreased level of perceived stress causes an increase in life satisfaction. For the reasons mentioned above, perceived stress will be examined in the study as a mediator of the relationship among disconnection and life satisfaction.
With the above in mind, following hypotheses were proposed:
H3: There is a positive relationship between social media disconnection and influencers’ life satisfaction.
H4a: Influencers disconnected from social media perceive less stress than influencers connected to social media.
H4b: Less perceived stress is associated with more life satisfaction.
Figure 1 presents the expected relations as stated in hypotheses. It does not show several control variables that were used. Gender and age were applied as they are associated with subjective well-being (Gerson, Plagnol, & Corr, 2016) and self-esteem (Bleidorn et al., 2016). Positive and negative life events that happened in particular periods of time could potentially influence how influencers felt. The job variable expressing to what extent is being an influencer a job was controlled because the break could be a break from work such as a day off or vacation which may affect the outcomes. Variables such as a number of followers and amount of time influencers spend on social media are linked to self-esteem and life satisfaction (Andreassen et al., 2017, Burrow & Rainone, 2017; Hofer & Aubert, 2013; Kalpidou et al., 2011; Samaha & Hawi, 2016; Sherlock & Wagstaff, 2018), thus they were included as control variables as well.
Figure 1. Conceptual model.
Method Procedure
Influencers are busy users and get a lot of messages and emails from their followers, but also brands and marketing agencies every day. In view of those facts, it was highly important to provide influencers with a smooth and time-saving way to participate in this study. A quantitative research method was used, specifically a cross-sectional online survey. A self-administered questionnaire was available online and it was possible to fill out it at any time. It was distributed directly to influencers by sending them an email or a message on Instagram with a link to the online questionnaire (see Appendix 3).
A technique of non-probability sampling, specifically convenience sampling, was used as a sampling method because it is time-saving and affordable, and it enables to reach a sample that is readily accessible (Etikan, Musan, & Alkassim, 2016). Influencers were
reached by activating researcher’s network of contacts on Instagram where influencers’ email addresses are publicly available, and it is possible to contact them by direct messages. In addition, it is a main platform for most influencers as well as for influencer marketing
(Mediakix, 2019; Williams, 2018). Influencers also actively forwarded the link for the questionnaire to their friends among influencers. It is classified as snowball sampling, a non-probability sampling method as well.
After opening the link, influencers were provided with a fact sheet describing a purpose of the study and what is guaranteed for participants, for instance safeguarded
anonymity, voluntary participation and right to withdraw permission to use data. To continue in the questionnaire, they had to give informed consent or refuse to participate. The latter led to the end of the survey. After agreeing to participate, influencers responded to questions about demographics, their background and social media use and then a set of questions related to main research concepts. The questionnaire was translated into Czech language which is also well understood by Slovak respondents. Data collection took place in the last week of May 2020, began on 22nd and ended on 29th of May.
Sample
Participants were influencers who were at least 18 years old and had at least 1000 followers because influencers are usually defined as social media users with 1000 followers and more (e.g., Kay, Mulcahy, & Parkinson, 2020; Rakoczy, Bouzeghoub, Gancarski, & Wegrzyn-Wolska, 2018). All participants had an Instagram account. The researcher aimed for 150 participants. 392 influencers were contacted by the researcher on Instagram or by email and some of the contacted influencers forwarded the link to an unknown number of
influencers. 220 respondents participated in the study. However, some of them (N = 36) did not finish the survey and some responses (N = 29) were excluded because respondents did not give informed consent or did not meet one or both conditions that were minimum age and minimum number of followers. The final sample was N = 155 influencers (84.5% female). The age ranged between 18 and 58 years (Mage = 28.40, SD = 6.07).
Following proposed division of influencers (e.g., Boerman, 2020; Lin et al., 2018), the majority (79.4%) of the final sample were macro-influencers (10,000 – 1 million followers). Participants came mostly from the Czech Republic (76.1%) and Slovakia (23.2%) and one respondent from Bosnia and Herzegovina. Participants used mostly Instagram (100%), Facebook (74.2%) and YouTube (53.5%) and they were most active as influencers on
Instagram (91.6%). 57.8% of participating influencers spend less than 3 hours on social media daily. 52.9% of participants work as influencers part-time. Expertise of participating
influencers was mostly lifestyle (43.2%). Measurements
Disconnection from social media. The variable was measured by asking respondents if they have ever taken a break from social media in the last year. The break was defined as a complete break from being active as an influencer on social media for a temporary period. Influencers were given the option to answer yes or no. The backup question was placed within the survey just in case the researcher would not gain enough respondents who have taken the complete break from social media. The question asked them if they have ever reduced their online time as an influencer in the last year. Online time reduction was explained as being still active as an influencer on social media and only restricting the amount of time spent online as an influencer. They were also offered to choose yes or no to answer the question. Based on their responses, respondents were classified into three groups. Breakers (29%) have taken the break. Non-breakers (42%) have not taken the break or reduced online time. Reducers (29%) have not taken the break, but they have reduced their online time. The concept of
disconnection was treated as a dichotomous variable with non-breakers and reducers coded as 0 and breakers coded as 1.
Life satisfaction. For measurement, the Diener, Emmons, Larson and Griffin’s
example of one of them was: “In most ways my life is close to my ideal.”. The other four statements can be found in the appendix. Influencers rated the scale by a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1(strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), based on a particular period of time differing between three groups of respondents. Periods were specified as during the break or period of online time reduction or in last year. The last one was applied for non-breakers. The reliability of the scale showed to be good with Cronbach’s alpha of .79 (M = 3.69; SD = 0.68).
Self-esteem. It was measured by the 10-item Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
(Rosenberg, 1965), specifically only by 9 items in contrary to its original 10 item proposal as the 9th item (“All in all, I was inclined to feel that I was not a failure.”) was not loading on any of the extracted factors during initial inspection. On a 5-point Likert scale, influencers could (1) strongly disagree or (5) strongly agree with statements, such as “I felt that I had a number of good qualities”. All statements are stated in the appendix. They provided their agreement based on a specific period of time differing between groups of respondents as it is mentioned above. Deleting the 9th item further improved reliability of the concept. The overall
Cronbach’s alpha showed good concept reliability with .89 (M = 3.66; SD = 0.59).
Perceived Stress. To measure the perceived stress, the 10-item Perceived Stress Scale was applied (Cohen, Kamarck & Mermelstein, 1983; Cohen & Williamson, 1988).
Influencers rated from 1 (never) to 5 (very often) the frequency how often they felt stressed in a specific period of time differing between groups of respondents as it is mentioned above. One example of the item was: “How often did you feel nervous and “stressed”?”. The rest of the items are placed in the appendix. Overall Cronbach’s alpha showed good concept
reliability with .84 (M = 2.57; SD = 0.59).
Positive Feedback. Measurement of the positive feedback slightly differed between groups of respondents. Non-breakers were asked if the positive feedback from their followers is important to them. Reducers answered whether they missed the positive feedback from
their followers during the period when they reduced time online. Breakers answered whether they missed the positive feedback during their break from social media. Response options were from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much). The average extent of positive feedback that is found in the sample is M = 3.13 (SD = 1.16).
Control variables. Age was open question (M = 28.40; SD = 6.07) as well as a
number of followers (M = 74001.23; SD = 140163.75). Gender (male, female, not binary) was coded as women = 1 (M = 0.85; SD = 0.36). Positive life events that happened during the break (breakers), reduction of online time (reducers) or last year (non-breakers) with response options yes (coded as 1) and no (M = 0.67; SD = 0.47). Operationalization was the same for negative events (M = 0.30; SD = 0.46). To measure the job variable, participants were asked to what extent is being an influencer their job with answer options full-time job (M = 0.28; SD = 0.45), part-time job (M = 0.53; SD = 0.50) or “It is not my job”. Daily social media use of influencers was measured by choice between 9 options ranged (1) less than 30 minutes to (9) more than 12 hours (M = 3.41; SD = 1.15).
Analysis
Data analysis was carried out by using the program SPSS. A multiple regression analysis was conducted to test hypotheses. In order to test hypothesis 2a, 2b, 4a and 4b, a mediation analysis was used applying the PROCESS macro developed by Hayes (2013).
Results
To get the first preliminary results of hypothesized relationships, a zero-order correlation analysis was done. The first results between the group of influencers more disconnected from social media, in other words breakers, with independent variables of self-esteem and life satisfaction showed non-significant results in both cases, with r = -.07, p = .388 for self-esteem and r = -.10, p .221 for latter. When assessing the same dependent variable and mediators, moderate and negative correlation with positive feedback (r = -.33, p
< .001) was inspected, but no significant relationship was found with perceived stress (r = -.06, p = .477). Moreover, the relationship between positive feedback and self-esteem was not found to be significant (r = .00, p = .984), while the relationship between perceived stress and life satisfaction was (r = -.34, p < .001). For a full overview of correlations amongst all constructs, see Table 1 in Appendix C.
Hypotheses testing
To answer the research question and its related hypotheses, 4 multiple regression models were run (see Table 2 and Table 3 in Appendix C). Two for main effects and two for mediated patterns. For all of the models, several control variables were also included. Namely age, gender, positive and negative life events, influencering as a job, a number of followers as well as time spent of social media.
The first hypothesis posited a negative relationship between social media
disconnection and influencers’ self-esteem. The results of a multiple regression analysis showed the model was not significant, with F(9, 144) = 1.60 and p = .121. Together, all the variables explained 3% of the variance in the self-esteem, thus reflecting a weak predictive power of the model (R2 = .03). Breakers, a group of participants who reported disconnection
from social media, were not significantly affected in terms of their selfesteem, b = .05, t = -.46, p = .648, 95% CI [-0.27, 0.17]. Therefore, the first hypothesis could not be supported.
For two hypotheses H2a and H2b, a mediation analysis with PROCESS (model 4; 5000 bootstraps samples; Hayes, 2018) was run, assuming a role of positive feedback in the main relationship. The results on a path between breakers and positive feedback as the outcome variable showed to be significant with b = -.72, t = -3.61, p < .001, 95% CI [-1.11, 0.32] and thus confirming the hypothesis H2a. Moreover, on the b path of this relationship between positive feedback and self-esteem, the results of the analysis were non-significant with F(10, 143) = 1.43 and p < .171 and decrease of predictive power from R2 = .23 on a path
to R2 = .09 on b path, with positive feedback reporting b = -.01, t = -0.24, p = .812, 95% CI
[-0.10, 0.08]. Thus, leading to rejection of the H2b hypothesis.
The third hypothesis posited a positive relationship between the more social media disconnected group (breakers) and their life satisfaction. The model of multiple regression run to test this relationship was significant with F(9, 144) = 2.26 and p = .022. Together, all the variables explained 6% of the variance in the self-esteem. However, the effect of main interest between breakers and life satisfaction was not found to be significant, b = -.12, t = -.98, p = .327, 95% CI [-0.36, 0.12]. Therefore, the third hypothesis could not be confirmed.
The presence of interaction for hypotheses H4a and H4b with hypothesized perceived stress as a mediator, was subsequently explored through regression analysis again using PROCESS macro (model 4; 5000 bootstraps samples; Hayes, 2018). On a path between breakers and perceived stress, the results showed to be non-significant. Being more disconnected from social media and categorized as a breaker did not significantly affect perceived stress, b = -.05, t = -.49, p = .621, 95% CI [-0.26, 0.15], with model results of F(9, 144) = 3.11 and p = .001 and explained variance of 16% (R2 = .16). Being more disconnected
from social media and categorized as a breaker did not significantly affect perceived stress, b = -.05, t = -.49, p = .621, 95% CI [-0.26, 0.15]. However, on the b path, effect between perceived stress and life satisfaction was seen as significant with significant model results of F(10, 143) = 3.28, p = .001 and increased explained variance to 19% and relationship results between variables with b = -.32, t = -3.33, p = .001, 95% CI [-0.,51, -0.13]. Therefore, rejecting the H4a hypothesis, but confirming the core of H4b hypothesis that more perceived stress leads to less life satisfaction.
Discussion & Conclusion
The study aimed to examine the relation between disconnection from social media and influencers’ self-esteem and life satisfaction. Besides, its goal was to test a role of perceived
stress as a mediator of the relationship between social media disconnection and life satisfaction as well as a mediating role of positive feedback for the relationship between disconnection and self-esteem. Most of the stated hypotheses were not supported in the study. A significant relationship was only between social media disconnection and positive feedback as well as between perceived stress and life satisfaction.
Based on the results, it was supported that influencers received less positive feedback and they missed it during social media disconnection. Positive feedback seems to be
important for influencers. This is understandable considering they have thousands or millions of followers and receive a substantial amount of feedback daily. Nevertheless, it was not affirmed that decrease of positive feedback negatively affects influencers’ self-esteem. There may occur factors affecting influencers’ self-esteem more than feedback, for instance social comparison with others. Following the social comparison theory (Festinger, 1954), offering the explanation that people compare with others to evaluate themselves, research found upward social comparison can decrease self-esteem (Lee, 2014; De Vries & Kühne, 2015; Vogel et al., 2014). Influencers may compare themselves with other influencers from their country or foreign influencers who are their inspirational peers.
According to the findings, the break does not significantly influence self-esteem of influencers. This can be explained by the potential fact that feedback along with activities such as editing profiles or maintaining relationships with followers are not such strong boosters of self-esteem as they seem to be (Gentile et al., 2012; Gonzales & Hancock, 2011; Wilcox & Stephen, 2013). As a result, their absence during the break is not able to affect influencers’ self-esteem. As previously mentioned, dependence can be a predictor of decreased self-esteem (Andreassen et al., 2017) because it can be triggered by a
misapprehension of users that the higher number of likes and followers one has, the more popular one is. When those dependent users face reality, it is possible for example during the
break from social media it may diminish their self-esteem (Köse & Doğan, 2019). However, it is probable that influencers are really popular in real life, therefore facing the reality does not cause changes in their self-esteem. The results may also be weakened by length of the break that was quite short on average among participants. Most influencers (73.2%) had taken the break for a week or less. There is a lack of research on the relationship between social media disconnection and users’ self-esteem, especially for specific users such as influencers. It seems necessary to conduct further research in this direction.
Results showed that the relationship between perceived stress and life satisfaction is negatively significant. It is aligned with previous research (e.g., Abolghasemi &Varaniyab, 2010; Coffman & Gilligan, 2002; Matheny et al. 2008) confirming that perceived stress predicts life satisfaction in the sense that a decreased level of perceived stress causes an increase in life satisfaction. Consequently, this study also supports the claim that more stress results in decreased life satisfaction (Samaha & Hawi, 2016).
The study showed no significant reduction in influencers’ perceived stress or increase in life satisfaction during disconnection from social media. This is in line with findings of Hall, Xing, Ross, and Johnson (2019) whose research showed no significant improvement in well-being during the period when social media use was limited. Vanman and colleagues (2018) even found that staying on social media in contrary to five days long disconnection brought reduction of perceived stress and enhancement of life satisfaction. The sample included mostly females (84.5%). Research revealed that females are more prone to social media dependence than males and found that a higher number of followers that is typical for influencers is associated with a higher level of social media dependence (Köse & Doğan, 2019). It supports the notion that participants belonged among dependent users who were heavily on social media. Social media dependency and overuse can negatively influence outcomes of social media use (e.g., Brooks, 2015; Brooks et al., 2016) and a break can
provide relief and gratification. Users who are prone to use social media excessively can benefit more from disconnection (Tromholt, 2016; Turel et al., 2018). On the other hand, dependent users can experience withdrawal symptoms that can negatively affect perceived stress as well as life satisfaction (Samaha & Hawi, 2016; Turel et al., 2018). One possible explanation of insignificant results can be the influences of potential dependency canceled one another out when users were disconnected. Nonetheless, it requires further research.
There is another possible explanation of insignificant results. Some studies (Hinsch & Sheldon, 2013; Sagioglou & Greitemeyer, 2014) found that disconnection can improve life satisfaction through a lower level of procrastination and positively influence mood because users consider social media use to be a meaningless activity. Nevertheless, influencers work on social media and create content for their followers which implies they do not procrastinate on social media as much as regular users. They also use social media to build relationships with thousands or millions of followers and to entertain, inspire or educate them through their online content which they probably regard as meaningful activities. In conjunction with the results, this indicates then that the way how influencers use social media can be an important factor impacting outcomes of social media use as well as social media disconnection. It is possible influencers have found their ways with being online and feel well and satisfied even though they are probably heavily active on social media and perhaps dependent on them. Future research should investigate differences in the use of social media between influencers and regular users and further examine the consequences of such dissimilarities.
The study has a few limitations. It used self-reported data for analysis. In the online questionnaire, influencers were asked to remember how they felt during a specific period of time, such as the break, the last year or the period of online time reduction. It follows influencers’ feelings were measured retrospectively what is peculiar for usage of online surveys (Kahneman, Krueger, Schkade, Schwarz, & Stone, 2004). It is possible the
respondents could have misjudged their level of life satisfaction, self-esteem or perceived stress due to the fact that they maybe did not remember clearly how they felt during the break or the other mentioned time periods. Therefore, future research should use diary sampling measures to allow influencers to describe their current feelings. The research was conducted with a sample that contained a fairly small number of breakers, which may be another reason why results were mostly insignificant. Future research should use a bigger sample.
This study succeeded in managing to get answers from a notoriously difficult to reach sample and it did so in a quick manner. The target sample of 150 participants was collected in a few days. This may encourage future research as it shows the research with influencers as participants is feasible. Findings suggest that users who are heavily active on social media and probably dependent on them do not benefit from going on a break in terms of self-esteem and life-satisfaction. This implies influencers have found their ways with using social media and feel good even though they are probably heavy users and dependent on social media. The study contributes to a small field where there is little knowledge as it brings interesting insights to the growing theoretical and empirical knowledge about the influence of social media disconnection on users’ life. There is a lack of research concerning influencers in general or specifically in the context of their social media use. This study showed results that further research can work with and take into account while designing a research study and developing conceptual models. Outcomes of the study can be also useful for development of social media quitting strategies and techniques for online time management.
References
Abidin, C. (2016). Visibility labour: Engaging with influencers’ fashion brands and #OOTD advertorial campaigns on Instagram. Media International Australia, 161 (1), 86–100. Doi:10.1177/1329878X16665177
Abolghasemi, A., & Varaniyab, S. T. (2010). Resilience and perceived stress: predictors of life satisfaction in the students of success and failure. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5, 748-752.
Andreassen, C. S., Pallesen, S., & Griffiths, M. D. (2017). The relationship between addictive use of social media, narcissism, and self-esteem: Findings from a large national survey. Addictive Behavior, vol. 64, pp. 287-293
Baker, D. A., & Algorta, G. P. (2016). The relationship between online social networking and depression: A systematic review of quantitative studies. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 19 (11), 638–648.
Ball-Rokeach, S. J., & DeFleur, M. L. (1976). A dependency model of mass-media effects. Communication research, 3(1), 3-21.
Barr, S. (2019, December 23). When consumers say they want a digital detox, this is what they really mean. Forbes. Retrieved from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenbarr/2019/12/23/when-consumers-say-they-want-a-digital-detox-this-is-what-they-really-mean/#38bc1a64ae7e (20 June 2019)
Bleidorn, W., Arslan, R. C., Denissen, J. J., Rentfrow, P. J., Gebauer, J. E., Potter, J., & Gosling, S. D. (2016). Age and gender differences in self-esteem—A cross-cultural window. Journal of personality and social psychology, 111(3), 396.
Boerman, S. C. (2020). The Effects of the Standardized Instagram Disclosure for Micro-and Meso- Influencers. Computers in Human Behavior, 103, 199-207.
Brailovskaia, J., Ströse, F., Schillack, H., & Margraf, J. (2020). Less Facebook use–More well-being and a healthier lifestyle? An experimental intervention study. Computers in Human Behavior, 106332.
Brooks, S. (2015). Does personal social media usage affect efficiency and well-being? Computers in Human Behavior, 46, 26-37.
Brooks, S., Schneider, C., & Wang, X. (2016). Technology addictions and technostress: An examination of Hong Kong and the US.
Burnell, K., & Kuther, T. L. (2016). Predictors of mobile phone and social networking site dependency in adulthood. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19(10), 621-627.
Burrow, A. L., & Rainone, N. (2017). How many likes did I get?: Purpose moderates links between positive social media feedback and self-esteem. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 69, 232-236.
Chen, W., & Lee, K. H. (2013). Sharing, liking, commenting, and distressed? The pathway between Facebook interaction and psychological distress. Cyberpsychology, behavior, and social networking, 16(10), 728-734.
Chen, H. (2018). College-aged young consumers' perceptions of social media marketing: The story of Instagram. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 39(1), 22-36. Childers, C. C., Lemon, L. L., & Hoy, M. G. (2019). # Sponsored# Ad: Agency Perspective
on Influencer Marketing Campaigns. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 40(3), 258-274.
Chua, T. H. H., & Chang, L. (2016). Follow me and like my beautiful selfies: Singapore teenage girls’ engagement in self-presentation and peer comparison on social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 190-197.
Coffman, D. L., & Gilligan, T. D. (2002). Social support, stress, and self-efficacy: Effects on students' satisfaction. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 4(1), 53-66.
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. J. Health Soc. Behav. 24 (4), 385–396.
Cohen, S., & Williamson, G. (1988) Perceived stress in a probability sample of the United States. Spacapan, S., & Oskamp, S. (Eds.), The social psychology of health: Claremont symposium on applied social psychology, Sage, Newbury Park, CA. De Veirman, M., Cauberghe, V., & Hudders, L. (2017). Marketing through Instagram
Influencers: the Impact of Number of Followers and Product Fivergence on Brand Attitude. International Journal of Advertising, 36(5), 798-828.
De Vries, D. A., & Kühne, R. (2015). Facebook and self-perception: Individual susceptibility to negative social comparison on Facebook. PAID, 86, 217–221. DOI:
10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.029
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75.
Eldor, K. (2018, October 19). 4 Reasons Why You Should Take A Social Media Break, Like Ariana Grande. Forbes. Retrieved from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/karineldor/2018/10/19/4-reasons-why-you-should-try-a-social-media-detox-like-ariana-grande/ (20 June 2019)
Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American journal of theoretical and applied statistics, 5(1), 1-4.
Festinger, L. (1954). A Theory of Social Comparison Processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117- 140.
Fox, J., & Moreland, J. J. (2015). The dark side of social networking sites: An exploration of the relational and psychological stressors associated with Facebook use and
affordances. Computers in human behavior, 45, 168-176.
Frederick, E. L., Lim, C. H., Clavio, G., & Walsh, P. (2012). Why we follow: An examination of parasocial interaction and fan motivations for following athlete archetypes on Twitter. International Journal of Sport Communication, 5(4), 481-502.
Frison, E., & Eggermont, S. (2016). “Harder, better, faster, stronger”: negative comparison on Facebook and Adolescents' life satisfaction are reciprocally related. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19(3), 158-164
Gentile, B., Twenge, J. M., Freeman, E. C., & Campbell, W. K. (2012). The effect of social networking websites on positive self-views: An experimental investigation. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1929-1933.
Gerson, J., Plagnol, A. C., & Corr, P. J. (2016). Subjective well-being and social media use: Do personality traits moderate the impact of social comparison on
Facebook?. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 813-822.
Gonzales, A. L., & Hancock, J. T. (2011). Mirror, mirror on my Facebook wall: Effects of exposure to Facebook on self-esteem. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14, 79 – 83. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2009.0411
Greitemeyer, T., Mügge, D. O., & Bollermann, I. (2014). Having responsive Facebook friends affects the satisfaction of psychological needs more than having many Facebook friends. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol., 36, 252–258.
Hall, J. A., Xing, C., Ross, E. M., & Johnson, R. M. (2019). Experimentally manipulating social media abstinence: results of a four-week diary study. Media Psychology, 1-17. Harrison, K. (2017, January 9). Top 10 Trends that will Transform Digital Marketing in 2017.
Forbes. Retrieved from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenbarr/2019/12/23/when-
consumers-say-they-want-a-digital-detox-this-is-what-they-really-mean/#5940ba27ae7e (20 June 2020)
Hayes, A. F. (2013). PROCESS macro for SPSS and SAS. Retrieved from http://processmacro.org/index.html
Hinsch, C., & Sheldon, K. M. (2013). The impact of frequent social Internet consumption: Increased procrastination and lower life satisfaction. Journal of Consumer
Hofer, M., & Aubert, V. (2013). Perceived bridging and bonding social capital on Twitter: Differentiating between followers and followees. Computers in Human
Behavior, 29(6), 2134-2142.
Hoffner, C. A., Lee, S., & Park, S. J. (2016). “I miss my mobile phone!”: Self-expansion via mobile phone and responses to phone loss. New Media & Society, 18(11), 2452-2468. Hunt, M. G., Marx, R., Lipson, C., & Young, J. (2018). No more FOMO: Limited social
media decreases loneliness and depression. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 37(10), 751–768. doi:10.1521/jscp.2018.37.10.751
Influencer Agency (2019). Influencer Screen Time Survey 2019. Retrieved from:
https://www.influencer.agency/influencer-screen-time-survey-2019/ (5 June 2020) Jong, S. T., & Drummond, M. J. (2016). Hurry up and ‘like’me: immediate feedback on
social networking sites and the impact on adolescent girls. Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education, 7(3), 251-267.
Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D. A., Schwarz, N., & Stone, A. A. (2004). A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: The day reconstruction method.
Science, 306(5702), 1776–1780. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1103572
Kalpidou, M., Costin, D., & Morris, J. (2011). The relationship between Facebook and the well-being of undergraduate college students. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14, 183–189. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0061
Kay, S., Mulcahy, R., & Parkinson J. (2020). When less is more: the impact of macro and micro social media influencers’ disclosure. Journal of Marketing Management. Doi:10.1080/0267257X.2020.1718740
Kim, Y. C., & Jung, J. Y. (2017). SNS dependency and interpersonal storytelling: An extension of media system dependency theory. New media & society, 19(9), 1458-1475.
Köse, Ö. B., & Doğan, A. (2019). The Relationship between Social Media Addiction and Self-Esteem among Turkish University Students. Addicta Turk. J. Addict, 6, 175-190. Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukophadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W.
(1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being?. American psychologist, 53(9), 1017.
Kross, E., Verduyn, P., Demiralp, E., Park, J., Lee, D.S., Lin., N., . . . & Ybarra, O. (2013). Facebook use predicts declines in subjective well-being in young adults. PLOS One, 8. e69841. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0069841
Leary, M. R. (2005). Sociometer theory and the pursuit of relational value: Getting to the root of self-esteem. European review of social psychology, 16(1), 75-111.
Leary, M. R., & Baumeister, R. F. (2000). The nature and function of self-esteem: Sociometer theory. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 1–62). San Diego, CA, US: Academic Press.
Leary, M. R., & Downs, D. L. (1995). Interpersonal functions of the self-esteem motive: The esteem system as a sociometer. In M. H. Kernis (Ed.), Efficacy, agency, and self-esteem (pp. 123–144). New York, NY, US: Springer.
Leary, M. R., Tambor, E. S., Terdal, S. K., & Downs, D. L. (1995). Self-esteem as an
interpersonal monitor: The sociometer hypothesis. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., 68, 518–530. Lee S. (2014) How do people compare themselves with others on social network sites?: The
case of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 32:253–260.
Lim, X. J., Radzol, A. M., Cheah, J., & Wong, M. W. (2017). The Impact of Social Media Influencers on Purchase Intention and the Mediation Effect of Customer Attitude. Asian Journal of Business Research, 7(2), 19-36.
Lin, H. C., Bruning, P. F., & Swarna, H. (2018). Using online opinion leaders to promote the hedonic and utilitarian value of products and services. Business Horizons, 61(3), 431-442.
Maier, C., Laumer, S., Eckhardt, A., & Weitzel, T. (2015). Giving too much social support: social overload on social networking sites. European Journal of Information
Systems, 24(5), 447-464.
Malik, S., & Khan, M. (2015). Impact of facebook addiction on narcissistic behavior and self-esteem among students. J Pak Med Assoc, 65(3), 260-263.
Marino, C., Gini, G., Vieno, A., & Spada, M. M. (2018). The associations between
problematic Facebook use, psychological distress and well-being among adolescents and young adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders, 226, 274-281.
Matheny, K. B., Roque Tovar, B. E., & Curlette, W. L. (2008). Perceived stress, coping resources, and life satisfaction among US and Mexican college students: A cross-cultural study. Anales de psicología.
Mediakix (2019). Influencer marketing 2019 industry benchmarks. Retrieved from
https://mediakix.com/influencer-marketing-resources/influencer-marketing-industry-statistics-survey-benchmarks/ (29 May 2020)
Mehdizadeh, S. (2010). Self-presentation 2.0: Narcissism and self-esteem on
Facebook. Cyberpsychology, behavior, and social networking, 13(4), 357-364. Montag, C., & Walla, P. (2016). Carpe diem instead of losing your social mind: Beyond
digital addiction and why we all suffer from digital overuse, Cogent Psychology, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1-9.
Oh, H. J., Ozkaya, E., & LaRose, R. (2014). How does online social networking enhance life satisfaction? The relationships among online supportive interaction, affect, perceived social support, sense of community, and life satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 69-78.
Perse, E. M., & Rubin, R. B. (1989). Attribution in social and parasocial relationships. Communication Research, 16(1), 59-77.
Przybylski, A. K., Murayama, K., DeHaan, C. R., & Gladwell, V. (2013). Motivational, emo- tional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29 (4), 1841–1848.
Pounders, K., Kowalczyk, C. M., & Stowers, K. (2016). Insight into the motivation of selfie postings: impression management and self-esteem. European Journal of Marketing. Rakoczy, M. E., Bouzeghoub, A., Gancarski, A. L., & Wegrzyn-Wolska, K. (2018). In the
search of quality influence on a small scale–micro-influencers discovery. In OTM Confederated International Conferences" On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems" (pp. 138-153). Springer, Cham.
Reitz, A. K., Motti-Stefanidi, F., & Asendorpf, J. B. (2015). Me, us, and them: Testing sociometer theory in a socially diverse real-life context. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Advance online publication.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Rushton, K. (2016). Teenagers now spend more than nine hours a day addicted to Facebook and Twitter on their laptops and smartphones. Retrieved from
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3514671/Teenagers-spend-nine-hours-day-addicted-Facebook-Twitter-laptops-smartphones.html (15 May 2020)
Samaha, M., & Hawi, N. S., (2016). Relationships among smartphone addiction, stress, academic performance, and satisfaction with life. Comput. Hum. Behav. 57, 321–325. Sagioglou, C., & Greitemeyer, T. (2014). Facebook's emotional consequences: Why
Facebook causes a decrease in mood and why people still use it. Comput. Hum. Behav. 35, 359–363.
Schoenebeck, S. (2014a). Developing healthy habits with social media: Theorizing the cycle of overuse and taking breaks. Proceeds of SIGCHI.
Schoenebeck, S. Y. (2014b). Giving up Twitter for Lent: how and why we take breaks from social media. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 773-782).
Sherlock, M., & Wagstaff, D. L. (2018). Exploring the relationship between frequency of Instagram use, exposure to idealized images, and psychological well-being in women. Psychology of Popular Media Culture.
Stieger, S., & Lewetz, D. (2018). A week without using social media: Results from an ecological momentary intervention study using smartphones. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 21(10), 618-624.
Tams, S., Legoux, R., & Léger, P. M. (2018). Smartphone Withdrawal Creates Stress: A Moderated Mediation Model of Nomophobia, Social Threat, and Phone Withdrawal Context. Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 81, pp. 1-9.
Turel, O., Cavagnaro, D. R., & Meshi, D. (2018). Short abstinence from online social networking sites reduces perceived stress, especially in excessive users. Psychiatry research, 270, 947-953.
Tracy, J. L., Cheng, J. T., Robins, R. W., & Trzesniewski, K. H. (2009). Authentic and hubristic pride: The affective core of self-esteem and narcissism. Self and identity, 8(2-3), 196-213.
Tromholt, M., 2016. The Facebook experiment: Quitting Facebook leads to higher levels of well-being. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 19 (11), 661–666.
Uzunoğlu, E., & Misci Kip, S. (2014). Brand communication through digital Influencers leveraging blogger engagement. International Journal of Information Management 34, 5, 592–602.
Valkenburg, P. M., Peter, J., & Schouten, A. P. (2006). Friend networking sites and their relationship to adolescents' well-being and social self-esteem. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 9, 584–590.
Valenzuela, S., Park, N., & Kee, K. F. (2009). Is there social capital in a social network site?: Facebook use and college students' life satisfaction, trust, and participation. Journal of computer-mediated communication, 14(4), 875-901.
Vanman, E. J., Baker, R., & Tobin, S. J. (2018). The burden of online friends: The effects of giving up Facebook on stress and well-being. The Journal of social
Vogel, E. A., Rose, J. P., Roberts, L. R., & Eckles, K. (2014). Social comparison, social media, and self-esteem. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 3(4), 206.
Wang, C., Lee, M. K., & Hua, Z. (2015). A theory of social media dependence: Evidence from microblog users. Decision Support Systems, 69, 40-49.
Wilcox, K., & Stephen, A. T. (2013). Are close friends the enemy? Online social networks, selfesteem, and self-control. Journal of Consumer Research, 40, 90 –103.
doi:10.1086/668794
Williams, R. (2018). Study: 93% of influencer campaigns use Instagram. Mobile Marketer. Retrieved from https://www.mobilemarketer.com/news/study-93-of-influencer-campaigns-use-instagram/542985/ (20 May 2020)
Wilson K., Fornasier S., & White K.M. (2010). Psychological Predictors of Young Adults' Use of Social Networking Sites. Cyberpsychology Behavior Social Networking, 13:173-7.
Zhan, L., Sun, Y., Wang, N., & Zhang, X. (2016). Understanding the influence of social media on people’s life satisfaction through two competing explanatory
Appendix A Survey Questionnaire Dear participant,
I would like to invite you to participate in this survey that is part of my Master thesis research at the Graduate School of Communication, a part of the University of Amsterdam. The study investigates social media use of influencers (who are aged 18 year and older who have at least 1000 followers on at least one of their social media accounts) and their lives.
You will be asked a set of questions regarding your experience with social media use. In addition, several questions concerning your socio-demographic information will be asked. It should take about 10 minutes of your time to fill out the survey. Thank you in advance for your time and effort.
As this research is being carried out under the responsibility of the ASCoR, University of Amsterdam, we can guarantee that:
• Your anonymity will be safeguarded, and that your personal information will not be passed on to third parties under any conditions unless you first give your express permission to this.
• You can refuse to participate in the research or cut short your participation without having to give a reason for doing so. You also have up to 24 hours after participating to withdraw your permission to allow your answers or data to be used in the research.
• Participating in the research will not entail your being subjected to any appreciable risk or discomfort, the researchers will not deliberately mislead you, and you will not be exposed to any explicitly offensive material.
• No later than five months after the conclusion of the research, we will be able to provide you with a research report that explains the general results of the research.
For more information about my research, please do not hesitate to contact me at petra.zelinkova@student.uva.nl any time. Should you have any complaints about this research, you can contact the designated member of the Ethics Committee representing the ASCoR, at the following address: ASCoR secretariat, Ethics Committee, University of Amsterdam, Postbus 15793, 1001 NG Amsterdam; 020‐525 3680; ascor‐secr‐fmg@uva.nl. Kind Regards,
Petra Zelinková
If you would like to participate in the survey, it is important that you read and consent with the following statement:
I hereby declare that I have been informed in a clear manner about the nature and method of the research, as described in the invitation for this study. I agree, fully and voluntarily, to
