The Global Use and Deficiency Paradigms: The Trend Between Online and Offline Social Interactions
The Global Use and Deficiency Paradigms: The Trend Between Online and Offline Social Interactions
Abstract
Global use and deficiency paradigms are two hypotheses used to define the relationship between online and offline social interactions. The global use paradigm suggests that individuals have the same pattern of behaviour online as they do offline, for example if they are popular online they will also be popular online. Contrary to this the deficiency paradigm proposes that people use social networking sites as compensation for social interactions not being met in an offline setting. In this essay I focus on the personality traits that are associated with the two paradigms in regards to social networking and parasocial interactions.
The Global Use and Deficiency Paradigms: The Trend Between Online and Offline Social Interactions
Social networking sites (SNSs) are online services that enable users to create profiles where they can share information about themselves, such as their interests and hobbies, post updates and photographs, communicate with current and old friends and participate in activities and events (Boyd & Ellison, 2007). The uses and gratification theory, arising in the 1940s, has been used in many research studies to evaluate the reasons why people use social media. Park, Kee & Valenzuela (2009) found that college students were using the online social media site, Facebook to satisfy their social and psychological needs. Their results showed that students were participating in Facebook groups to be kept up to date with events occurring on and off campus, to socialise with friends and to gain self-status (Park et al. 2009).
Since the development of the internet, the online behaviour of users has become an increasingly popular area of study among social researchers, in particular online popularity on social media sites such as Facebook compared to offline popularity (Zywica & Danowski, 2008). The global use and deficiency paradigms
Abstract
Global use and deficiency paradigms are two hypotheses used to define the relationship between online and offline social interactions. The global use paradigm suggests that individuals have the same pattern of behaviour online as they do offline, for example if they are popular online they will also be popular online. Contrary to this the deficiency paradigm proposes that people use social networking sites as compensation for social interactions not being met in an offline setting. In this essay I focus on the personality traits that are associated with the two paradigms in regards to social networking and parasocial interactions.
The Global Use and Deficiency Paradigms: The Trend Between Online and Offline Social Interactions
Social networking sites (SNSs) are online services that enable users to create profiles where they can share information about themselves, such as their interests and hobbies, post updates and photographs, communicate with current and old friends and participate in activities and events (Boyd & Ellison, 2007). The uses and gratification theory, arising in the 1940s, has been used in many research studies to evaluate the reasons why people use social media. Park, Kee & Valenzuela (2009) found that college students were using the online social media site, Facebook to satisfy their social and psychological needs. Their results showed that students were participating in Facebook groups to be kept up to date with events occurring on and off campus, to socialise with friends and to gain self-status (Park et al. 2009).
Since the development of the internet, the online behaviour of users has become an increasingly popular area of study among social researchers, in particular online popularity on social media sites such as Facebook compared to offline popularity (Zywica & Danowski, 2008). The global use and deficiency paradigms
References: Ashe, D.D., & McCutcheon, L.E. (2001). Shyness, Loneliness and Attitude Towards Celebrities. Current Research in Social Psychology 6(9), 124-130. Boyd, D.M., & Ellison, N.B. (2007). Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230. Freberg, K., Adams, R., McGaughey, K., & Freberg, L. (2010). The rich get richer: Online and offline social connectivity predicts subjective loneliness. Media Psychology Review, 3(1). Horton, D., & Wohl, D.D. (1956). Mass Communication and Parasocial Interaction: Observations on Intimacy at a Distance. Psychiatry, 19, 215-229. Mehdizadeh, S. (2010). Self-presentation 2.0: Narcissism and self-esteem on Facebook. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13(4), 357-364. Park, N., Kee, K.F., & Valenzuela, S. (2009). Being Immersed in Social Networking Environment: Facebook Groups, Uses & Gratifications and Social Outcomes. CyberPsychology & Behaviour 12(6), 729-733. Tsao, J. (1996). Compensatory media use: An exploration of two paradigms. Communication Studies, 47(1-2), 89-109. Zywica, J., Danowski, J. (2008). The Faces of Facebookers: Investigating Social Enhancement and Social Compensation Hypotheses; Predicting Facebook™ and Offline Popularity from Sociability and Self-Esteem, and Mapping the Meanings of Popularity with Semantic Networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(1).