- Alhabash, S., & Ma, M. (2017). A tale of four platforms: Motivations and uses of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat among college students?. Social media + society, 3(1),
- Bányai, F., Zsila, Ã., Király, O., Maraz, A., Elekes, Z., Griffiths, M. D., & Demetrovics, Z. (2017). Problematic social media use: Results from a large- scale nationally representative adolescent sample. PloS one, 12(1), e0169839.
- Brandtzæg, P. B., & Heim, J. (2009). Why people use social networking sites. Online Communities and Social Computing, 143- 152.
- Charney, T. & Greenberg, B. (2001). Uses and gratifications of the Internet. In C. Lin & D. Atkin (Eds.), Communication, technology and society: New media adoption and uses. Hampton Press
- Couldry, N. (2006). Culture and citizenship: The missing link?. European journal of cultural studies, 9(3), 321-339.
- Dhaha, I. S. Y., & Igale, A. B. (2013). Facebook usage among Somali youth: A test of uses and gratifications approach. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 3(3), 299-313.
- Dogruer, N., Menevi, I., & Eyyam, R. (2011). What is the motivation for using Facebook?. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2642-2646
- Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “Friends:†social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143-1168.
- Enli, G. S., & Thumim, N. (2012). Socializing and self-representation online: Exploring Facebook. Observatorio (OBS*), 6(1).
- Facebook MAU worldwide 2020. (2021, April 28). /
- Gil-Or, O., Levi-Belz, Y., & Turel, O. (2015). The “Facebook-selfâ€: Characteristics and psychological predictors of false self- presentation on Facebook. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 99.
- Griffiths, M. D., & Kuss, D. (2017). Adolescent social media addiction (revisited). Education and Health, 35(3), 49-52.
- Hargittai, E. (2007). Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of Computer- Mediated Communication, 13(1), 276-297.
- Hollenbaugh, E. E. (2011). Motives for maintaining personal journal blogs. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(1-2), 13-20.
- Horzum, M. B. (2016). Examining the relationship to gender and personality on the purpose of Facebook usage of Turkish university students. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 319-328.
- 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.
- Kuss, D. J., & Griffiths, M. D. (2011). Online social networking and addiction—a review of the psychological literature. International journal of environmental research and public health, 8(9), 3528-3552.
- Lee, E., Kim, Y. J., & Ahn, J. (2013). Effects of brand self-disclosure and user social connectedness on response to Facebook brand fan pages. The Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 13(8), 60-71.
- Leung, L. (2013). Generational differences in content generation in social media: The roles of the gratifications sought and of narcissism. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 997-1006.
- Makashvili, M., Ujmajuridze, B., & Amirejibi, T. (2013). Gender Difference in the Motives for the Use of Facebook. Asian Journal for Humanities and Social Studies (AJHSS), 1(03), 130-135.
- Marino, C., Finos, L., Vieno, A., Lenzi, M., & Spada, M. M. (2017). Objective Facebook behavior: Differences between problematic and non-problematic users. Computers in Human Behavior, 73, 541-546.
- MartÃn-Barbero, J. (1993). Communication, culture and hegemony: From the media to mediations (164). London: Sage
- Nadkarni, A., & Hofmann, S. G. (2012). Why do people use Facebook?. Personality and individual differences, 52(3), 243-249.
- Noumeur, M. N. (2019). Online Self- Representation Of Malaysian Women:: A Facebook Case Study Of University Students. Jurnal Pengajian Media Malaysia, 21(1), 15-30.
- Papacharissi, Z. (2002). The presentation of self in virtual life: Characteristics of personal home pages. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 79(3), 643-660.
- Papacharissi, Z., & Rubin, A. M. (2000). Predictors of Internet use. Journal of broadcasting & electronic media, 44(2), 175- 196.
- Peachey, A., & Childs, M. (2011). Virtual worlds and identity. Reinventing Ourselves: Contemporary Concepts of Identity in Virtual Worlds, 1-12.
- Rubin, R. B., Perse, E. M., & Barbato, C. A. (1988). Conceptualization and measurement of interpersonal communication motives. Human Communication Research, 14(4), 602-628.
- Ryan, T., Chester, A., Reece, J., & Xenos, S. (2014). The uses and abuses of Facebook: A review of Facebook addiction. Journal of behavioral addictions, 3(3), 133-148.
- Silverstone, R. (1999). What's new about new media? Introduction. New Media & Society, 1(1), 10-12.
- Williamson, E. J., Walker, A. J., Bhaskaran, K., Bacon, S., Bates, C., Morton, C. E., & Goldacre, B. (2020). Factors associated with COVID-19-related death using OpenSAFELY. Nature, 584(7821), 430- 436.
- Wood, M. A., Bukowski, W. M., & Lis, E. (2016). The digital self: How social media serves as a setting that shapes youth’s emotional experiences. Adolescent Research Review, 1(2), 163-173.
- Yang, C. C., & Brown, B. B. (2013). Motives for using Facebook, patterns of Facebook activities, and late adolescents’ social adjustment to college. Journal of youth and adolescence, 42(3), 403-416.
- Yu, E., & Kim, H. C. (2020). Is she really happy? A dual-path model of narcissistic self-presentation outcomes for female facebook users. Computers in Human Behavior, 108, 106328.
Abstract
The last two decades have seen a continuous increase in the use of social networking sites (SNS) amongst people of all age groups. Each individual has different motives and needs for self-representation on these sites, which are related to certain motives and needs. This research investigated four different socio and psychological motives of social and affection on Facebook by Pakistani youth. Data was collected from students at International Islamic University, Islamabad through a questionnaire by employing convenient sampling techniques. Results showed that Facebook users' main motives were social and affection, and exhibitionism, which were not the same for males and females as well as users of different age groups.
Key Words:
Self-representation on SNS, Facebook, Motives of Self-representation. Age and Gender-wise Differences
Introduction
As a matter of fact, societal contact and communication with others are intrinsic yearnings and craving of human beings. Man has been using different technologies and tools for this purpose. The present age is termed as the age of technology. Social networking sites have got faster and more progressive growth in the recent past (Chang et al., 2015). In fact, social networking was initially created to satisfy user’s personal communication needs. Millions of people became its users due to its ease. The report Digital 2021: Global Overview estimates that 4.20 billion people use social media globally. This is roughly 54% of the entire world's population. This number is rising daily; since January 2020, active social media usage has increased by 13%, or 490 million people (Avocado Social, 2021).
As of the third quarter of 2021, there were 2.91 billion active users on Facebook, making it the most widely used and largest social network worldwide ("Facebook MAU worldwide 2020," 2021). In Pakistan, it is the most widely used social networking platform. Facebook users are growing in number in Pakistan. In terms of the Facebook user audience, Pakistan is ranked ninth in the globe ("Facebook users by country 2021," 2021). Facebook has a large user base and draws people of all ages. Facebook is a user's personal media platform that is important for self-representation (Lampe, Ellison, & Steinfeld, 2007).
According to the uses and gratification theory, people employ media to represent themselves in accordance with their desires because of social and psychological demands. The Uses and Gratifications Hypothesis (Katz et al. 1973) sheds light on the gratifications that users of social media seek out and experience, as well as how these gratifications vary depending on the user. Also, people use social media to satisfy their desires. According to the communication model, people choose a particular medium that may satisfy their intended demands mostly because of their motivations (Rubin et al., 1988). The key finding of the motives model was that people are conscious of their motivations before engaging in any communication (Rubin et al. 1988). According to Charney and Greenberg people use the internet for the gratification of their needs such as communication, pleasure, identity seeking, diversion, and entertainment and for their careers (Charney & Greenberg, 2001). Park and Floyd argued that with audience activity, individual social and psychological factors have an influence on communication motives' uses and gratification theory supports their work (Park & Floyd, 1996). According to another study, teenage and young adult Facebook use is associated with in order to investigate user motivation for maintaining web pages, Papacharissi took into consideration the concept of impression management. She discovered that website users alter the information on their personal webpage for purposes like spying, amusement., professional advancement, diversion, social utiutility,d self-expression (Papacharissi, 2002). Based on definition of Goffman Papacharissi claimed, "a web page provides the ideal setting for the presentation of self-information, since it allowed a carefully crafted performance through which impression management was achieved under optimal conditions." A Facebook member could be subject to similar allegations (Papacharissi, 2002). According to a research (Papacharissi and Rubin 2000), an individual's social presence and online motivations are closely related. Their key results also indicated that information seeking, as opposed to other needs like interpersonal face-to-face communication, is the primary driver behind internet use and is the primary reason why people communicate with one another online. Thus, research of Papacharissi and Rubins also provided proof that the internet is an alternative medium for people who usually avoid interpersonal face to face communication (Papacharissi & Rubin, 2000). Dhaha & Igale (2013) explored six vital factors of using Facebook among the youth of Somalia. He discovered that the main reasons people use Facebook are for self-expression, amusement, passing the time, virtual companionship, and knowledge. Brandtzaeg & Heim (2009) conducted research on 1122 users of social networking sites to examine how individuals used SNSs to achieve their goals. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were used in their study. Their findings demonstrate a variety of Facebook usage motivations, including social interaction, individual identification, information seeking, and entertainment. However, the stated information, friendship, and amusement motives of Kim, Sohan, and Choi (Kim, Sohn & Choi , 2011). Hargittai conducted research on Facebook users in 2007. He highlighted the gender difference in Facebook use. He argued that men have less time, so they use Facebook very frequently than females. The motives of females were social needs, entertainment and passing time whereas men want to make new relationship thought Facebook, and female wants to maintain an existing relationship (Hargittai, 2007). a wide range of adverse consequences for their personal psychological well-being (Bányai et al., 2017; Kuss & Griffiths, 2011; Ryan, Chester, Reece, & Xenos, 2014). Facebook users might favour virtual social interactions to in-person ones. Using Facebook become their compulsive behavior. According to Wood, social networking sites are mediated communication platforms that enable users to communicate with one another by offering a variety of features that allow users to display traits of their desired constructed personal identities. This enables social networking site users to quickly determine what is appropriate for their self-representation. (Wood et al., 2015). In social media, self-representation is more obvious and evident than in traditional media. In the online world, amateurs place more of their attention on self-promotion than on engaging in productive activities where they can demonstrate their individuality and uniqueness (Burgess & Green, 2009). Facebook users may start regulating their emotions and engage in cognitive preoccupation, leading to stress and anxiety in actual life. Thus, they find difficulties in managing their lives and experience negative consequences in real life (Marino et al., 2017). Today's youth belong to the generation that was raised in the period of digital applications. As a result, they are genuine "digital natives" (Siegle, 2011). People, particularly young people, use Facebook for a variety of reasons. While there are many reasons why people use SNSs, establishing and sustaining relationships both online and offline is one of the main reasons (Alhabash & Ma 2017) (Kuss & Griffiths 2011, 2017). The benefits and pleasures can also vary depending on the Network used. Facebook, for instance, can be used to meet the need to belong and to show oneself. (Nadkarni & Hofmann, 2012).
Facebook is used by individuals to represent themselves in a flexible goal-directed way that enables desired self-representation to accomplish desired goals. Users both explicitly and implicitly reflect themselves (Enli & Nancy, 2012). Furthermore, Facebook allows users to reflect a constructed self-due to the lack of physical appearance. People may therefore be more eager to show themselves in particular ways to manage their best impressions of others and feel satisfied. This necessitates a need to determine the reasons why people use social media, particularly Facebook. As a result, the self-representation may have an impact on the satisfaction objectives that individuals have for their online self-representation.
Very few studies have been conducted to explore self-representation and Facebook user motives (Horzum, 2016). The current study's goal was to ascertain what motivates individuals to use Facebook for self-representation.
A critical review of the available literature on Facebook shows that researchers have used the notion self-presentation instead of self-representation (Savneet & Malik, 2012); (Grieve et al., 2020); (Gil-Or et al., 2015); (Noumeur, 2019); (Yu & Kim, 2020); (Kim & Ahn, 2013). Few researchers have used the notion of self-representation. People use the Internet to "reinvent themselves" in the virtual world. Internet users show their second selves in the virtual world there (Peachey & Childs, 2011). Furthermore, Human representation is based on how they framed themselves in photographs, images and text on the cinema screen and websites etc (Silverstone, 1999; Couldry, 2006; Martin-Barbero, 1993). The concept of self-representation is centered on symbolic forms created and then disseminated which link it to the field of representation. According to Thumim and Sara Enli when socializing online on Facebook, people construct their self- representation. (Thumim & Enli, 2012). Thumim argued that to participate in online social networks such as Facebook, individuals have no choice but to represent themselves (Thumim, 2009; Thumim, 2012). Therefore, it is very important to understand the concept of online self -representation and the social and psychological dimension of human motives which individuals gratify through self-representation on Facebook.
(i) The researchers designed the present study to address the questions that (1) what are the motives of Facebook users behind their self-representation on Facebook? and (2) Do people belonging to different gender and age groups have different motives of self-representation on Facebook?
Methodology
For data collection, a survey research technique was used. The survey method is useful to know the attitudinal and behavioral aspects of individuals. The population of the study was young Facebook users. A convenient sampling technique was employed for data collection. The sample mainly comprised of undergraduate students because recent studies indicated that Facebook usage is common among university students (Dogruer, ?2011). Students who were studying in the BS program of International Islamic University were the sample of the study. Undergraduate Students were selected as the population of the study. Initially, 250 students have approached out of which 177 students met the inclusion criteria (using Facebook), hence the final sample size was 177. Cohen, Cohen, Aiken and West (2003) proposed a minimum sample size of 150 for two predictors in the study. As this study mainly has two predictors which are gender and age, hence the sample size is appropriate. Students from the media and communication school who also used Facebook were chosen as a sample. Out of 250 students, 177 had strong responses, of which 100 were from the female group and 77 from the male category.
The researchers developed a questionnaire for data collection considering the objectives of the study and related literature review. The questionnaire contained 12 different close-ended questions. The empirical indicators of social and psychological dimensions behind self-representation are social and affection motive, recognition, exhibitionism, and cognitive motive. Literature shows numerous inventories of Facebook users’ motives. Leung, (2013) identified social and affection motive, recognition motive, cognitive motives, and exhibitionism motive as the motives of self-representation on Facebook. Hence the researchers adopted Leung’s dimensions of self-representation in the present study.
Four statements about Facebook use, including I use Facebook to share my interest, view, and thought, I use Facebook to understand myself, I use Facebook to voice out my discontent, and I use Facebook to let my anger out, were questioned to study the social and affection motive. Three statements—I use Facebook to promote my expertise, I use Facebook to establish my personal identity, and I use Facebook to obtain respect and support—were used to examine the recognition motive and cognitive motive. I use Facebook to sharpen my thinking, and I use Facebook to attract people's attention, were two of the comments that were used. Three statements, including "I use Facebook because it makes me cool among peers," "I use Facebook because I want to gain renown," and "I use Facebook because I like when people think about me," were used to demonstrate exhibitionism. The survey had a 5-point Likert scale with responses ranging from firmly disagree to strongly agree (1932). Statements were used as the data gathering tools.
The researchers used ascending order for
the level of agreement with the given statements. They coded strongly agree as 5, agree as 4, neutral as 3, disagree as 02 and strongly disagree as 01.
Data were analyzed by using SPSS. The questionnaire was consisted of two pieces of demographic information of students. It also contained 12 items that were related to the motives of Facebook users' self-representation. Data were analyzed by using mean value with the help of a computed sum of indicators and then the data was tabulated, analyzed, and understood in light of the study's goals. The researchers employed Cronbach alpha for examining the internal consistency of the data collection tool. Alpha Coefficient was calculated at .88 for 14 items. For the analysis of gender difference, the researchers used t –test and ANOVA was used for the analysis age differences as these are most appropriate to measure reliability.
Sample Characteristics
The present study investigated gender and age–wise differences among respondents. The researchers analyzed the demographic characteristics of the respondents, particularly in terms of gender and age. Table 1 given below shows Sample characteristics which are as follows.
Table 1. Gender and Age-wise Frequency Distribution of the Sample
| Variables width="107">Min width="107">Max width="107">Mean width="107">? | > MFB width="107">20 width="107">100 width="107">58.84 width="107">.88 | > 1. SAF width="107">4 width="107">20 width="107">11.66 width="107">.80 | > 2. REC width="107">3 width="107">15 width="107">8.99 width="107">.78 | > 3. COG width="107">1 width="107">5 width="107">3.14 width="107">.72 | > 4. EXH width="107">4 width="107">20 width="107">11.28 width="107">.90 | ||
| Demographics width="144">Frequency width="174">Percentage | > Gender width="133" valign="top">Male width="144">77 width="174">43.50 | > Female width="144">100 width="174">56.50 | > Age> > width="133" valign="top">18-21 width="144">76 width="174">42.90 | > 22-24 width="144">67 width="174">37.90 | > 25-27 width="144">27 width="174">15.30 | > 28 & above width="144">7 width="174">4.00 | |
Key: SOC (Social and affection motive), REC (recognition motive) COG (cognitive motive) EXH (exhibitionism motive) COM (communication motive)
The collected data show social and affection motive (11.66) and exhibitionism motives (11.28) respectively, which are higher than other motives such as recognition motive (8.99) and cognitive motive (3.14). Data revealed that the major motive, due to which people represent themselves on Facebook is "social and exhibitionism" motive.
Gender-wise Differences in Self-representation Motives. Table 3. Means, Standard Deviation and T-test of Motives.
| width="20%" colspan="2"> Males width="16%" colspan="2">Females width="11%">width="7%"> width="17%" colspan="2"> 95% CI width="12%">
| > Measures width="9%">M width="11%">SD width="8%">M width="8%">SD width="11%">t width="7%">p width="8%">LL width="8%">UL width="12%">Cohens d | > SN width="9%">13.32 width="11%">4.01 width="8%">10.37 width="8%">2.58 width="11%">5.9 5.13 width="7%">.00 width="8%">1.97 width="8%">3.93 width="12%">.50 | > REC width="9%">10.25 width="11%">3.24 width="8%">8.02 width="8%">2.50 width="11%">5.15 width="7%">.00 width="8%">1.37 width="8%">3.07 width="12%">.45 | > COG width="9%">3.49 width="11%">1.19 width="8%">2.86 width="8%">1.15 width="11%">3.55 width="7%">.00 width="8%">.28 width="8%">.98 width="12%">.28 | > EXH width="9%">13.31 width="11%">4.32 width="8%">9.72 width="8%">3.82 width="11%">5.84 width="7%">.00 width="8%">2.37 width="8%">4.80 width="12%">.55 |
| Demographics width="72">Categories width="90" colspan="2">SAN align="center"> width="102" colspan="2">REC width="90" colspan="2">COG width="93" colspan="2">EXH | > width="72"> width="42"> M width="48">SD width="54">M width="48">SD width="42">M width="48">SD width="48">M width="45">SD | > Age (Years) width="72">19-21 width="42">11.30 width="48">3.25 width="54">8.95 width="48">3.037 width="42">3.22 width="48">1.239 width="48">11.41 width="45">4.398 | > width="72"> 22-24 width="42">10.76 width="48">2.731 width="54">8.60 width="48">2.594 width="42">2.96 width="48">1.199 width="48">10.09 width="45">4.010 | > width="72"> 25-27 width="42">14.33 width="48">4.641 width="54">10.00 width="48">3.731 width="42">3.33 width="48">1.144 width="48">14.11 width="45">4.191 | > width="72"> 28 & above width="42">13.71 width="48">4.645 width="54">9.29 width="48">4.071 width="42">3.14 width="48">1.345 width="48">10.43 width="45">5.028 | > ANOVA F width="72">width="42"> F= 8.35 width="48">F= 1.39 width="54">F = .86 width="48">F 5.87 width="42">width="48"> width="48"> width="45">
| > ?-value width="72">width="42"> ? = .00 width="48">? = .24`` width="54">? = .46 width="48">? = .00 width="42">width="48"> width="48"> width="45">
|