Social and Parasocial Relationships on Social Network Sites and Their Differential Relationships
with Urs’Psychological Well-Being
Young Min Baek,PhD,1
Young Bae,PhD,2and Hyunmi Jang,MS 3
Abstract
With the advent of social network sites (SNSs),people can efficiently maintain preexisting social relationships
and make online friendships without offline encounters.While such technological features of SNSs hold a variety of potential for individual and collective benefits,some scholars warn that u of SNSs might lead to socially negative conquences,such as social isolation,erosion of social cohesion,or SNS addiction.This study distinguishes types of SNS relationships,and investigates their relationships with social isolation,interpersonal trust,and SNS addiction.We classify SNS relationships into two types:(a)social relationships bad on reci-procity between a ur and his/her friends,and (b)parasocial relationships in which an ordinary ur is aware of activities of a celebrity (
<,famous actors,athletes,and others)but not vice versa.Bad on achievements in studies of media effect and social psychology,we constructed a t of hypothes,and tested them using a subsample of SNS urs drawn from reprentative survey data in South Korea.We found that dependency on parasocial relationships is positively related with loneliness but negatively correlated with interpersonal distrust,while dependency on social relationship is negatively correlated with loneliness but positively related with trust.However,more dependency on both social and parasocial relationships are positively related with SNS ad-diction.Implications bad on findings are also discusd.
Introduction
S
ocial network sites (SNSs)such as Twitter,Facebook,Cyworld,or MySpace provide mediated social relation-ships enabling urs to share their thoughts with friends,re-store old relationships with acquaintances,and make online friendships without offline encounters.1,2SNSs are different from conventional mass media,in terms of interactivity,and instant and personalized communication bad on social networks.2While social media are different from mass media,both are dominant platforms f
读书笔记摘抄大全or mediated communication in a modern society.Since people interact with others using communication technologies,the emergence of a new me-dium is expected to change existing social interaction.3Human relationships are an important factor influencing constructs often ud to define the quality of psychological well-being,such as loneliness or belongingness,trust towards others,and technology addiction.Therefore,diffusion of a new medium changes how people interact with others,which in turn influences people’s psychological well-being.
In this vein,it is natural to obrve scholastic controversies over the effect of SNS u on psychological well-being.On one hand,some scholars expect that frequent message ex-change between SNS friends helps people to form stronger membership 2,4and also to obtain so-called ‘‘weak ties’’5that provide urs with a greater volume and higher quality of news.Converly,others contend that the newly available SNS relationships are superficial or ephemeral,and that they displace authentic face to face relationships,which in turn leads to social isolation and dismantles social cohesion.6,7The goal of this study is to explain why SNS u can result in such opposite influences by distinguishing types of SNS mediated relationships.
Two types of SNS relationship
Basically put,SNSs compri a new type of online rvice.In order to evaluate SNSs’effects on urs’psychological well-being,it is helpful to refer to previous studies examining people’s different usage of the Internet and its social
1Department of Communication,Yoni University,Seoul,Republic of Korea.
2
Department of Information Sociology,Soongsil University,Seoul,Republic of Korea.3
Department of Communication,Seoul National University,Seoul,Republic of Korea.
C YBERPSYCHOLOGY ,B EHAVIOR ,AN
D S OCIAL N ETWORKING Volume 16,Number 7,2013ªMary Ann Liebert,Inc.
DOI:10.1089/cyber.2012.0510
512
psychological conquences.Past scholarship of the issue has concluded that the Internet effect is n
either positively nor negatively monolithic.For example,studies have found that networking oriented Internet ,e-mail,instant chat-ting,online forums)help build expansive human networks, strengthen social bonding,and promote social trust,but en-tertainment oriented Internet u leads to loneliness,social distrust,or Internet addiction.8–12In this n,it can be in-ferred that the effect of SNSs on psychological well-being might change,depending on the type of SNS u. Regarding the type of SNS u,Kwak et al.’s study found that some Twitter urs mutually follow each other,while others only follow other urs without mutual interaction.13 Put differently,some Twitter urs’interaction is symmetric, like interpersonal conversation,but others’interaction is asymmetric,that is,one ur follows the other but not vice versa,like an audience consuming mass media content.Re-lying on data from Facebook urs,Burke et al.also found that mutual relationships with Facebook friends increa so-cial ,quality of social networks)and decrea loneliness,but asymmetric ,more receiving but less giving messages)hurt social capital and increa loneliness.14In short,whether a SNS relationship is ,reciprocal)is a diverging condition to differ-entiate the effect of SNSs on psychological well-being. Parasocial relationships and their relationships
with psychological well-being
This study thus distinguishes reciprocal relationships from unidirectional ones,where an ordinary SNS ur receives messages from celebrities,such as movie stars,singers,ath-letes,or politicians.1516In the literature of media psychology, such unilateral relationships have been conceptualized as parasocial relationships,defined as‘‘simulacrum of conversa-tional give and take’’between the mass media performers and the audience.17(p215)For example,SNS urs making ‘‘SNS friendships’’with celebrities hold imaginary unilateral relationships,which are clearly distinguished from reciprocal ones where two(or more)urs know one another.For a parasocial relationship to be effective,according to Horton and Wohl,17(p125)the audience should form the‘‘illusion of[a] face-to-face relationship[with a performer].within which much may be added by fantasy’’becau the performer is not aware of the audience and their reactions.
Becau parasocial relationships between the audience and performers lack reciprocity and authenticity,past scholarship tested whether the audience of parasocial relationships shows symptoms of poor psychological well-being,such as loneli-ness,alienation,or life dissatisfaction.For example,McQuail et al.argue that people’s desire for parasocial relationships leads to deficiency in social life becau such relationships are merely illusionary compensation for unsatisfactory real world relationships.18,19Thus,indulgence in parasocial rela-tionships leads to social isolation,detach
es the audience from real relationships,and results in heavy mass media con-sumption.20–22Although some studies have found that neg-ative effects of parasocial relationships might be overcome if audience members successfully identify themlves with media performers,23,24many studies have confirmed that parasocial relationships with celebrities who lives are very distant from tho of ordinary people more or less result in life dissatisfaction,frustration,alienation,or loneliness,17,25,26 and rious indulgence in media u to escape from the ,obsd media u,loss of control).7,17If such reasoning is accurate,we can expect that:
H1:Dependency on parasocial relationships with celebrities on SNSs is positively related with loneliness and SNS
addiction,but negatively related with interpersonal trust
among SNS urs.
Reciprocal relationships and their relationships
with psychological well-being
While parasocial SNS relationships between urs and ce-lebrities remble the mass media model,
mutually interac-tive SNS friendships are akin to conversations via phones, e-mail exchange,or online chatting.13Since mutually inter-active online communication is interpersonal,like face to face interaction,a past studies have demonstrated that reciprocal interaction on the Internet strengthens existing friend-ships10,12,27and even facilitates offline meetings,which in turn lowers loneliness and fortifies social bonding.11Thus,we can anticipate that:
H2a:Reciprocal social relationships on SNSs are negatively related with loneliness but positively related with in-
terpersonal trust.
However,in terms of SNS ,obsd SNS u):
H2b:Dependency on reciprocal social relationships on SNSs could be positively correlated with SNS addiction.
This is becau active interaction with SNS friends means urs are more attentive on the given SNS,and urs might be afraid that SNS abstinence might hurt the ongoing reciprocal relationship.
Methods
Sample
To test the hypothes,national reprentative survey data were ud.Survey respondents were recruited from the Ko-rean Ipsos panel,which is an online survey rvice bad on national samples of Internet urs in South Korea.There are about660,000people on the Ipsos panel.Out of the,a total of 404Korean adults who u at least one ,Twitter, Facebook,me2day,Cyworld,or other rvices)were recruited to test our hypothes.The survey was conducted in January 2012.On average,lected respondents utilized two SNSs (M=2.20,SD=1.10;median=2)and reported they ud SNSs about six days per week(M=5.62,SD=2.28,median=6).
Types of SNS relationship
We distinguish ,reciprocal)relationships from parasocial ones.To measure both types of relationship,we asked respondents for the number of their mutual SNS friendships and the number of their nonmutual ones with celebrities,such as movie stars,athletes,or politicians.In the ca of Twitter,we distinguished mutual following from mere following.The distribution of social relationships was skewed,indicating that some respondents reported to have many relationships(M=51.03,SD=179.69,range0–3,000).
SOCIAL AND PARASOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS ON SOCIAL NETWORK SITES513
However,the median number of reciprocal relationships was 10,which corresponds to previousfindings on the number of acquaintances per person.28In the ca of parasocial rela-tionships,the problem of skewed distribution was also found (M=9.03,SD=12.77,median=4,range0–80).
To adjust for the skewed distribution,the number of each relationship was log transformed(M social=1.16,SD social= 0.65,range0–3.48;M parasocial=0.70,SD parasocial=0.55,range 0–1.91).The two types of SNS relationship are slightly cor-related with each other(r=0.25,p<0.001).b
Measures of psychological well-being
This study examined three constructs of psychological well-being:(a)loneliness,(b)interpersonal trust,and(c)SNS addiction.First,the UCLA loneliness scale29was modified and shortened for the SNS context in Korea.There werefive statements in the loneliness scale:‘‘When using SNS,I feel isolated from others’’;‘‘SNS friends are not‘with’me’’;‘‘When using SNS,I feel sometimes left out’’;‘‘No SNS friends know the‘real’me’’;and‘‘SNS relationships are superficial.’’Bad on a conventional5-point Likert scale(1=‘‘strongly disagree,’’5=‘‘strongly agree’’),respondents were asked to indicate thei
r agreement with each statement(Cronbach’s a=0.89,M=2.70,SD=0.74).
花蓝Second,interpersonal trust was measured using Rotter’s interpersonal trust scale,30which was modified for the SNS context in Korea.There werefive statements in the inter-personal trust scale:‘‘Online urs in general try to take advantage of others’’;‘‘Generally speaking,online urs are lfish’’;‘‘You can’t be too careful when dealing with online urs’’;‘‘Online urs in general are fair’’;and‘‘Generally speaking,online urs can be trusted.’’Respondents were asked to estimate their agreement with thefive statements, bad on a5-point Likert scale.After reverly coding the first three statements,respondents’agreement on thefive
statements was averaged(Cronbach’s a=0.84,M=3.55, SD=0.66).
Finally,SNS addiction was measured by modifying the Korean Internet addiction scale for the SNS context.31Basi-cally,SNS addiction aims to measure the degree of perceived obssion of SNS u or withdrawal symptoms from SNS abstinence.There were four statements on the SNS addiction scale:‘‘Whenever I have time,I log on to my SNS account’’;‘‘Frequently,I regret I consume too much time using SNS rvices’’;‘‘If I could not u SNS rvices,I would be de-presd’’;and‘‘If I stopped using SNS,my social relationships would be ruined.’’Using the same scale as for the other constructs,
respondents’agreement on the four statements was averaged(Cronbach’s a=0.83,M=2.94,SD=0.86). Statistical controls
Socio-demographical variables and SNS behaviors were additionally controlled for statistical adjustment.The socio-demographical variables were the respondents’gender,age (measured in years),monthly income,and educational achievement.Regarding SNS behaviors,a lf-report of daily SNS u(measured by the hour)and number of SNS accounts was included.A dichotomous variable for whether a re-spondent ud Twitter was also added becau Twitter is the most popular SNS for forming parasocial interactions with celebrities.Descriptive statistics of socio-demographics and SNS behaviors can be found in Table1.
Results
To test the hypothes,three outcome variables were re-gresd on two types of SNS relationships as well as ven statistical controls.Results of ordinary least square regression analys are provided in Table2.As shown in the column under loneliness,SNS urs’subjective loneliness is nega-tively related with social relationships(b=-0.18,p<0.01).By contrast,urs’loneliness is positively related with depen-dency on parasocial relationship(b=0.14,p<0.001). Interpersonal trust,however,sh
ows opposite patterns. SNS urs’interpersonal trust is positively related with de-pendency on social relationships on SNSs(b=0.15,p<0.01), but it is negatively correlated with dependency on parasocial relationships with celebrities(b=-0.16,p<0.05).
Unlike loneliness and interpersonal trust,the number of social relationships on SNS addiction shows positive rela-tionships with both social and parasocial relationships on SNS(b=0.41,p<0.001in social relationships;b=0.36, p<0.001in parasocial relationships).
To sum up,higher reliance on social relationships is neg-atively related with subjective loneliness and interper-sonal trust,but positively related with indulgence in SNS u. Table1.Descriptive Statistics of Statistical Controls
Frequency Percentage Gender
Male22957% Female17543% Age
19–2913233% 30–3913433% 40–498421% q505413% Educational achievement
Less than high school graduate61% High school graduate5915% College/BA30074% Advanced degree over BA3910% Monthly income{
<$1,00011729% $1,000–$2,00011027% $2,000–$3,0009123% $3,000–$4,0004110% $4,000–$5,000184% $5,000–$6,000154% q$7,000123% Time u for SNS(hour)M=2.19(SD=3.12) Number of SNS accounts
1account14536%
2accounts10225%
3accounts9022% q4accounts6717% Twitter urs
Urs16040% Nonurs24460% Note.N=404.Monthly income{was measured by Korean Won but is translated to U.S.dollars here.
514BAEK ET AL.
However,higher dependency on parasocial relationships is positively related with feelings of isolation,lowers interper-sonal distrust,and addictive SNS u.In short,our rearch hypothes (H1,H2a,and H2b)are supported by the em-pirical results.Discussion姐妹花图片
The goal of this study was to test the effect of SNS u on urs’psychological well-being,in terms of
subjective lone-liness,interpersonal trust,and SNS addiction.Past scholar-ship shows controversy over the nature of SNSs’effect on psychological well-being.Some argue that SNSs fortify pre-existing human networks and go beyond constrained offline relationships,which in turn reduces loneliness and promotes interpersonal trust.Others,however,focus on the quality of relationships formed via SNSs,and argue that SNS relation-ships reduce authentic face to face interaction,which in-creas social isolation and erodes interpersonal trust.
By focusing on types of relationships formed via SNS,this study distinguishes reciprocal relationships where two urs know each other from unidirectional ones where one parti-cipant knows the other but not vice versa.Borrowing the concept of parasocial relationships from media psychology,we focus on unidirectional SNS relationships in which an ordinary ur watches the SNS activities of celebrities but the celebrities are not aware of the ur’s activities.Results show that higher reliance on parasocial SNS relationships is posi-tively related with loneliness and distrust,with which de-pendency on social relationships is negatively related.However,both types of SNS relationship are correlated with addictive SNS u.
Our findings clearly show that a monolithic view of the
effect of SNSs is naı
偏旁¨ve and unrealistic.From the perspective of psychological well-being,what matters is whether SNS related relationships are reciprocal (i.e.,interpersonal).De-pending on the type of SNS mediated relationship,SNS u may either enhance or harm urs’psychological well-being.Despite the difference between SNS mediated and face to face interaction,the psychological functions of SNS relationships,if reciprocal ,would be similarly beneficial to tho of face to face ones.As far as SNS mediated rela-tionships are mutual,our findings suggest that SNS effects em to be positive for both individual mental health and social cohesion.However,if a person does not u SNSs reciprocally,s/he might not accrue mental benefits.There-fore,psychological rearch and/or clinical studies in the future should be oriented to such urs,rather than SNS urs in general.
Despite yielding interesting findings about the effects of SNSs on urs’psychological well-being,this study suffers from veral limitations.First,causality bad on cross-ctional survey might not be determined,and thus descrip-tion of our findings fails to adopt causal terms.While prior studies assume the effect of media u on psychological well-being,cross-ctional survey data do not tell whether media u affects psychological well-being or vice versa.To solve this causality issue,future studies should replicate this one while relying on longitudinal panel data.
Second,this study lacks a mediating psychological state between dependency on SNS relationships
and measures of psychological well-being.Prior studies found that people form different attachment styles,32,33which mediates para-social relationships with psychological outcomes examined in this study.Psychological mediators are imperative,especially for SNS addiction.While this study found that both social and parasocial relationships are related with SNS addiction,each relationship could be differently mediated.For example,SNS urs highly dependent on social relationships may tend toward addiction in order to fortify their existing
婉拒Table 2.Results of Ordinary Least Square Regressions Testing the Effects of Types of SNS Relationships
on Loneliness,Interpersonal Trust,and SNS Addiction
Loneliness
Interpersonal trust SNS addiction
Baline model
Test model
Baline model Test model
Baline model
Test model
Intercept 2.35***(0.25) 2.48***(0.26) 3.57***(0.23) 3.49***(0.24) 2.62***(0.29) 1.86***(0.28)
Gender (female =1)0.06(0.08)0.05(0.08)0.01(0.07)0.02(0.07)0.04(0.09)0.13(0.08)Age (unit =10years)0.13**(0.04)0.10*(0.04)-0.05(0.04)-0.02(0.04)0.04(0.05)0.05(0.04)Educational achievement 0.02(0.07)0.04(0.07)0.10(0.06)0.08(0.06)0.08(0.08)0.05(0.07)Houhold income 0.01(0.02)0.02(0.02)-0.03(0.02)-0.04(0.02)-0.02(0.03)-0.04(0.03)Time u for SNS (hour)0.02(0.01)0.01(0.01)-0.03**(0.01)-0.03*(0.01)0.04**(0.01)0.03*(0.01)Number of SNS accounts -0.06(.04)-0.07(0.04)-0.02(0.03)-0.01(0.04)-0.08(0.04)0.01(0.04)Twitter-only urs (1if yes)0.04(0.08)0.04(0.08)
-0.01(0.08)
0.01(0.08)0.15(0.10)0.04(0.09)Number of social
relationships (log transformed)
-
0.18**(0.06)0.15**(0.06)0.41***(0.07)Number of parasocial relationships (log transformed)0.14*(0.07)-0.16*(0.06)
0.36***(0.08)
R 20.040.070.040.060.050.20
D R 20.03**0.02**0.15***Adj.R 20.030.05
0.020.04
0.03
0.18
Note .*p <0.05,**p <0.01,***p <0.001.Columns indicate unstandardized regression coefficients with standard errors in parenthes.Social relationship indicates that a ur and the ur’s SNS friends know each other,while parasocial relationship indicates that a ur knows celebrities but not vice versa.
SOCIAL AND PARASOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS ON SOCIAL NETWORK SITES 515
病人康复的祝福语friendships.However,tho highly relying on parasocial re-lationships might tend toward addiction in order to escape from their existing friendships.Conceptualizing tho miss-ing mediators may empirically solve why different types of relationships are similarly related with addictive SNS u. Third,this study focus only on the number of relation-ships of each type,but not the intensity of each relationship. For example,assume two SNS urs,one of whom forms10 reciprocal relationships while the other has100relationships. In terms of intenly interactive relationships,the two urs might not be different becau most SNS activities happen around a few lected friends.5Even if a person forms100 reciprocal relationships,she mainly exchanges messages with her clo friends or family members.While the number of relationships is still a meaningful measure of SNS u,future studies might derive interestingfindings by conceptualizing different dimensions of SNS u that are not examined here, such as relationship intensity.
Fourth,parasocial relationships can be further divided.For example,SNS urs can form parasocial relationships with ,famous bloggers).Also experience of parasocial relationships with celebrities might not be homo-geneous becau some are responsive while others not.Bad on previous studies,20,23,25parasocial relationships with noncelebrities or highly interactive celebrities reduces psy-chological distance between audience and target,which in turn increas ide
ntification and results in psychological less negative or even positive outcomes.In other words,further classification of parasocial relationships remains an interest-ing rearch question in the future.
Finally,intercultural differences should be critically considered.Given that the Korean culture is strongly char-acterized by collectivism,a strong association between dependency on SNS relationships and SNS addiction might reflect the uniqueness of Korean society.Since people in a collectivistic culture feel a strong obligation to give prompt respons to others’communicative overtures,urs main-taining more social relationships are more likely to be ad-dicted to SNSs.To asss whetherfindings from this study hold true elwhere,replicating this study in a different ,an individualistic culture like that of the United States)would be necessary.
Despite veral limitations,our study’sfindings are novel and demonstrate that the psychological effects of SNSs differ, depending on the way urs form relationships with other urs.This study also shows that interactive media originally designed for social interaction can be ud like old-fashioned mass media,as exemplified by an audience’s imaginary re-lationship with celebrities.Most importantly,reciprocal SNS mediated relationships contribute to increas in social trust and belongingness,in the same way that face to face rela-tionships do.In terms of psychological well-being,this study advis that clo examination of potentially problematic usages of ,paras
ocial relationships highlighted in this study),rather than SNSs themlves,would be more productive both theoretically and practically.
Notes
a.This study has no intention to argue reciprocal online mediated interaction is inferior or superior to a face to face one.Social prence theory,3,10for example,might argue that online mediated interaction is inferior to a face to face one becau its social cues are limited.However,social informa-tion processing theory may argue that online mediated interaction could be more advantageous becau urs can engage in more lective lf-prentation.
b.While the correlation between two types of SNS rela-tionships is not huge,the obrved0.25correlation is not totally ignorable.In fact,time for SNS u shows a correlation between dependency on parasocial relationships(r=0.17, p<0.001)and dependency on social relationships(r=0.11, p<0.05),indicating that heavy SNS urs are active in form-ing both types of relationships.
Acknowledgments
关于的名言We are grateful to Dr.June Woong Rhee,Dr.Eunmee Kim, and Dr.Irkwon Jeong for their valuable comments on thefirst draft of this article.
Author Disclosure Statement
No competingfinancial interests exist.
References
光荣战士1.boyd dm,Ellison NB.Social network sites:definition,his-
tory,and scholarship.Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication2007;13:210–30.
2.Ellison NB,Steinfield C,Lampe C.The benefits of Facebook
‘‘friends’’:social capital and college students’u of online social network sites.Journal of Computer-Mediated Com-munication2007;12:1143–68.
3.Baym NK.(2010)Personal connections in the digital age.
Cambridge:Polity.
4.Freberg K,Adams R,McGaughey K,et al.The rich get ri-
cher:online and offline social connectivity predicts subjec-tive loneliness.Media Psychology Review2010;3.
5.Granovetter MS.The strength of weak ties.American Jour-
nal of Sociology1973;78:1360–80.
6.Gentzler AL,Oberhaur AM,Westerman D,et al.College
students’u of electronic communication with parents: links to loneliness,attachment,and relationship quality.
Cyberpsychology,Behavior,&Social Networking2011;
14:71–4.
7.Turkle S.(2011)Alone together:why we expect more from
technology and less from each other.New York:Basic Books.
8.Kraut R,Patterson M,Lundmark V,et al.Internet paradox:a
social technology that reduces social involvement and psy-chological well-being?American Psychologist1998;59:1017–
31.
9.Putnam RD.(2000)Bowling alone:the collap and revival of
American community.New York:Simon&Schuster.
10.Stepanikova I,Nie NH,He X.Time on the Internet at home,
loneliness,and life satisfaction:evidence from panel time-diary data.Computers in Human Behavior2010;26:329–38.
11.Wellman B,Haa AQ,Witte J,et al.Does the Internet in-
crea,decrea,or supplement social capital?American Behavioral Scientist2001;45:436–55.
12.Zhao S.Do Internet urs have more social ties?A call for
differentiated analys of Internet u.Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication2006;11:844–62.
13.Kwak H,Lee C,Park H,et al.(2010)What is Twitter,a social
network or a news media?Proceedings of the19th International Conference on World Wide Web.Raleigh,NC:ACM.
516BAEK ET AL.
