PEN Academic Publishing   |  ISSN: 1949-4270   |  e-ISSN: 1949-4289

Original article | Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 2019, Vol. 14(4) 167-189

Personal Differences and Social Networking: A Comparison of Two Countries

Oğuzhan Atabek

pp. 167 - 189   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2019.220.10   |  Manu. Number: MANU-1908-26-0001.R1

Published online: December 29, 2019  |   Number of Views: 36  |  Number of Download: 143


Abstract

This study examines the relationship between personal differences and use of Facebook by pre-service teachers and compares the results from Turkey and the U.S. In addition to the “big five” personality traits, attitude, motivation, and specific motives are also examined among personal differences. The sample consisted of 762 pre-service teachers who use Facebook. Regression analyses conducted on the data collected from the two countries revealed, firstly, that personal differences are associated with Facebook use. Secondly, however, the associations differed remarkably between the two countries. Even individuals with the same personal characteristics used Facebook differently between the countries. On the other hand, in both countries a strong privacy concern and a perceived ‘unrealness’ emerged as negative factors. Individuals who consider social networking services as a place to pass time are avid users in both countries, as well. Furthermore, agreeableness and friendship related to Facebook use were not factors in either country.

Keywords: Social networking service; Facebook; Personality; NEO-FFI; Motive; Motivation.


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Atabek, O. (2019). Personal Differences and Social Networking: A Comparison of Two Countries . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 14(4), 167-189. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2019.220.10

Harvard
Atabek, O. (2019). Personal Differences and Social Networking: A Comparison of Two Countries . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 14(4), pp. 167-189.

Chicago 16th edition
Atabek, Oguzhan (2019). "Personal Differences and Social Networking: A Comparison of Two Countries ". Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 14 (4):167-189. doi:10.29329/epasr.2019.220.10.

References
  1. Allport, G. W. (1935). Attitudes. In C. Murchison (Ed.), A handbook of social psychology (pp. 798-844). Worcester: Clark University Press. [Google Scholar]
  2. Amichai-Hamburger, Y., & Vinitzky, G. (2010). Social network use and personality. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1289-1295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.018 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  3. Arpaci, I., Kilicer, K., & Bardakci, S. (2015). Effects of security and privacy concerns on educational use of cloud services. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 93-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.075 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  4. Aydin, S. (2012). A review of research on Facebook as an educational environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(6), 1093-1106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9260-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  5. Baltaci-Goktalay, S., & Ozdilek, Z. (2010). Pre-service teachers’ perceptions about web 2.0 technologies. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 4737-4741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.760 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  6. Beri, N., & Sharma, L. (2019). Teachers’ attitude towards integrating ICT in teacher education. International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering, 8(8), 285-295. Retrieved from https://www.ijitee.org/download/volume-8-issue-8/ [Google Scholar]
  7. boyd, d. m. & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  8. Bugeja, M. J. (2006). Facing the Facebook. Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(21), 1-4. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/Facing-the-Facebook/46904 [Google Scholar]
  9. Carpenter, J. M., Green, M. C., & LaFlam, J. (2011). People or profiles: Individual differences in online social networking use. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(5), 538-541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.11.006 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  10. Çevik, Y. D., Çelik, S., & Haşlaman, T. (2014). Teacher training through social networking platforms: A case study on Facebook. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(6), 714–727. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.615 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  11. Dishaw, M., Strong, D. M., & Bandy, D. B. (2002). Extending the task-technology fit model with self-efficacy constructs. AMCIS 2002 Proceedings. Paper 143. Retrieved from https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2002/143/ [Google Scholar]
  12. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. [Google Scholar]
  13. Ewen, R. B. (2003). An introduction to theories of personality, (6th ed.). New Jersey, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar]
  14. Facebook (2019). Facebook stats. Retrieved from http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/ [Google Scholar]
  15. Fairchild, A. J., MacKinnon, D. P., Taborga, M. P., & Taylor, A. B. (2009). R2 effect-size measures for mediation analysis. Behavior Research Methods, 41(2), 486–498. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.2.486 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  16. Fewkes, A. M., & McCabe, M. (2012). Facebook: Learning tool or distraction? Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(3), 92-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2012.10784686 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  17. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading: Addison-Wesley. [Google Scholar]
  18. Gangadharbatla, H. (2008). Facebook me: Collective self-esteem, need to belong, and internet self-efficacy as predictors of the iGeneration’s attitudes toward social networking sites. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 8(2), 5-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2008.10722138 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  19. Greenhow, C., & Robelia, B. (2009). Old communication, new literacies: Social network sites as social learning resources. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 1130-1161. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01484.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  20. Gurven, M., von Rueden, C., Massenkoff, M., Kaplan, H., & Vie, M. L. (2013). How universal is the big five? Testing the five-factor model of personality variation among forager–farmers in the Bolivian Amazon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(2), 354–370. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030841 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  21. Haridakis, P. M., & Rubin, A. M. (2003). Motivation for watching television violence and viewer aggression. Mass Communication & Society, 6(1), 29-56. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0601_4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  22. Haskell, R. W. (1971). Effect of certain individual learner personality differences on instructional methods. Educational Technology Research and Development, 19(3), 287-297. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02768322 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  23. Hew, K. F. (2011). Students’ and teachers’ use of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 662-676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.11.020 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  24. Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(3), 223-252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  25. Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  26. Hofstede Insights. (2018). Hofstede Insights country comparison. Retrieved from https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/south-korea,turkey,the-usa/ [Google Scholar]
  27. Hughes, D. J., Rowe, M., Batey, M., & Lee, A. (2012). A tale of two sites: Twitter vs. Facebook and the personality predictors of social media usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 561-569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.11.001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  28. Keles, E. (2018). Use of Facebook for the Community Services Practices course: Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework. Computers & Education, 116, 203-224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.09.003 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  29. Keller, J. M., & Burkman, E. (1993). Motivation principles. In M. Fleming & W.H. Levie (Eds.), Instructional message design: Principles from the behavioral and cognitive sciences. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA: Educational Technology Press. [Google Scholar]
  30. Kim, Y., Sohn, D., & Choi, S. M. (2011). Cultural difference in motivations for using social network sites: A comparative study of American and Korean college students. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 365-372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.08.015 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  31. Kirschner, P. A., & Karpinski, A. C. (2010). Facebook and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1237-1245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.024 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  32. Landers, R. N., & Lounsbury, J. W. (2006). An investigation of Big Five and narrow personality traits in relation to Internet usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(2), 283-293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.06.001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  33. Lewis, K., Kaufman, J. & Christakis, N. (2008). The taste for privacy: An analysis of college student privacy settings in an online social network. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(1), 79–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2008.01432.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  34. Manca, S., & Ranieri, M. (2016). Is Facebook still a suitable technology-enhanced learning environment? An updated critical review of the literature from 2012 to 2015. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(6), 503-528. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12154 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  35. Mazman, S. G., & Usluel, Y. K. (2010). Modeling educational usage of Facebook. Computers & Education, 55(2), 444-453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.008 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  36. McAdams, D. P. (1992). The five-factor model in personality: A critical appraisal. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 329-361. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00976.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  37. McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 175-215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00970.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  38. Nadkarni, A., & Hofmann, S. G. (2012). Why do people use Facebook? Personality and Individual Differences, 52(3), 243-249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.11.007 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  39. Orchard, L., Fullwood, C., Galbraith, N., & Morris, N. (2014). Individual differences as predictors of social networking. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 19(3), 388–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12068 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  40. Ozkan, B., & McKenzie, B. (2008). Social networking tools for teacher education. In K. McFerrin, R. Weber, R. Carlsen, & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2008 International Conference (pp. 2772-2776). Las Vegas: AACE. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/27640/ [Google Scholar]
  41. Raacke, J., & Bonds-Raacke, J. (2008). MySpace and Facebook: Applying the uses and gratifications theory to exploring friend-networking sites. CyberPsychology & Behaviour, 11(2), 169–174. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2007.0056 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  42. Ross, C., Orr, E.S., Sisic, M., Arseneault, J.M., Simmering, M.G., & Orr, R.R. (2009). Personality and motivations associated with Facebook use. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 578-586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.024 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  43. Rutherford, C. (2010). Facebook as a source of informal teacher professional development. In education, 16(1), 60-74. [Google Scholar]
  44. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  45. Ryan, T., & Xenos, S. (2011). Who uses Facebook? An investigation into the relationship between the Big Five, shyness, narcissism, loneliness, and Facebook usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5), 1658-1664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.02.004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  46. Selya, A. S., Rose, J. S., Dierker, L. C., Hedeker, D., & Mermelstein, R. J. (2012). A Practical Guide to Calculating Cohen’s f2, a Measure of Local Effect Size, from PROC MIXED. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 111, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00111 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  47. Seidman, G. (2013). Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: How personality influences social media use and motivations. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(3), 402-407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.10.009 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  48. Sheldon, P. (2008). Student favorite: Facebook and motives for its use. Southwestern Mass Communication Journal, 23(2), 39-53. [Google Scholar]
  49. Song, L., Hannafin, M. J., & Hill, J. R. (2007). Reconciling beliefs and practices in teaching and learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(1), 27-50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9013-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  50. Song, S. H., & Keller, J. M. (2001). Effectiveness of motivationally adaptive computer-assisted instruction on the dynamic aspects of motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(2), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504925 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  51. Spitzberg, B. (2006). Preliminary development of a model and measure of computer-mediated communication (CMC) competence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 629–666. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00030.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  52. Triandis, H. C. (2001). Individualism‐collectivism and personality. Journal of Personality, 69(6), 907-924. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.696169 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  53. Ünal, E., Yamaç, A., & Uzun, A. M. (2017). The effect of the teaching practice course on pre-service elementary teachers’ technology integration self-efficacy. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 5(3), 39-53. Retrieved from https://www.mojet.net/volume/volume-5-issue-3 [Google Scholar]
  54. Vasalou, A., Joinson, A. N., & Courvoisier, D. (2010). Cultural differences, experience with social networks and the nature of “true commitment” in Facebook. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(10), 719-728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2010.06.002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  55. Wigfield, A., Guthrie, J., Tonks, S., & Perencevich, K. (2004). Children's motivation for reading: Domain specificity and instructional influences. The Journal of Educational Research, 97(6), 299-309. https://doi.org/10.3200/joer.97.6.299-310 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]