skip to main content
research-article
Open Access

Who has a Choice?: Survey-Based Predictors of Volitionality in Facebook Use and Non-use

Published:13 July 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

This paper examines volitionality of Facebook usage, that is, which individuals feel they have a choice about whether or not to use the site. It analyzes data from two large surveys, conducted three years apart. Across the two surveys, a variety of factors impacted whether or not respondents saw their Facebook usage as a matter of their own choice, such as engaging in non-use behaviors, measures of Facebook addiction, a sense of their own agency, and, across both studies, level of education. These results expand on prior literature around technology use and non-use, especially in terms of which populations may feel obligated to use, or be unwillingly prevented from using, social media such as Facebook. Furthermore, they provide potential implications both for future work and for technology policy.

References

  1. Alessandro Acquisti and Ralph Gross. 2006. Imagined Communities: Awareness, Information Sharing, and Privacy on the Facebook BT - Privacy Enhancing Technologies, George Danezis and Philippe Golle (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 36--58.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Cecilie Schou Andreassen, Torbjørn Torsheim, Geir Scott Brunborg, and Ståle Pallesen. 2012. Development of a Facebook Addiction Scale. Psychological Reports, Vol. 110, 2 (2012), 501--517. https://doi.org/10.2466/02.09.18.PR0.110.2.501--517Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Anne Archambault and Jonathan Grudin. 2012. A Longitudinal Study of Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter Use. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2741--2750. https://doi.org/10.1145/2207676.2208671Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Eric P. S. Baumer. 2018. Socioeconomic Inequalities in the Non use of Facebook. In CHI 2018. Montreal, QC, Canada, 1--14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174190Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Eric P. S. Baumer, Phil Adams, Vera D. Khovanskaya, Tony C. Liao, Madeline E. Smith, Victoria Schwanda Sosik, and Kaiton Williams. 2013. Limiting, leaving, and (re)lapsing. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '13. ACM Press, Paris, France, 3257. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466446Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Eric P. S. Baumer, Jenna Burrell, Morgan G. Ames, Jed R. Brubaker, and Paul Dourish. 2015a. On the Importance and Implications of Studying Technology Non -Use. interactions, Vol. 22, 2 (2015), 52--56. https://doi.org/10.1145/2723667Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Eric P. S. Baumer, Shion Guha, Emily Quan, David Mimno, and Geri K. Gay. 2015b. Missing Photos, Suffering Withdrawal, or Finding Freedom? How Experiences of Social Media Non-Use Influence the Likelihood of Reversion. Social Media+Society, Vol. 1, 2 (2015), 205630511561485. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115614851Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Eric P. S. Baumer, Patrick Skeba, Shion Guha, and Geri K. Gay. 2019. All Users are (Not) Created Equal: Predictors Vary for Different Forms of Facebook Non/use. Proceedings of the ACM: Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 3(CSCW) (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Eric P. S. Baumer, Rui Sun, and Peter Schaedler. 2018. Departing and Returning : Sense of Agency As an Organizing Concept for Understanding Social Media Non /Use Transitions. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., Vol. 2, CSCW (Nov. 2018), 23:1--23:19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274292Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Nancy K. Baym, Kelly B. Wagman, and Christopher J. Persaud. 2020. Mindfully Scrolling : Rethinking Facebook After Time Deactivated. Social Media+Society, Vol. 6, 2 (April 2020), 2056305120919105. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120919105Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. V. Benet-Martinez and O. P. John. 1998. Los Cinco Grandes across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait multimethod analyses of the Big Five in Spanish and English. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology1, Vol. 75 (1998), 729--750.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Jeremy Birnholtz. 2010. Adopt, Adapt, Abandon : Understanding Why Some Young Adults Start, and Then Stop, Using Instant Messaging. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 26, 6 (Nov. 2010), 1427--1433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.04.021Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Erika Blacksher. 2002. On Being Poor and Feeling Poor: Low Socioeconomic Status and the Moral Self. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, Vol. 23, 6 (2002), 455--470. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021381616824Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Richard J. Bolton and David J. Hand. 2002. Statistical fraud detection: A review. Statist. Sci., Vol. 17, 3 (2002), 235--255. https://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1042727940Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Anindita Chakraborty. 2016. Facebook Addiction: An Emerging Problem. American Journal of Psychiatry Residents' Journal, Vol. 11, 12 (12 2016), 7--9. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp-rj.2016.111203Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Nitesh V. Chawla, Kevin W. Bowyer, Lawrence O. Hall, and W. Philip Kegelmeyer. 2002. SMOTE: Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, Vol. 16 (6 2002), 321--357. https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.953Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Hsuan-Ting Chen. 2018. Revisiting the Privacy Paradox on Social Media With an Extended Privacy Calculus Model: The Effect of Privacy Concerns, Privacy Self-Efficacy, and Social Capital on Privacy Management. American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 62, 10 (8 2018), 1392--1412. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218792691Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. J Clement. 2020. Number of monthly active Facebook users worldwide as of 2nd quarter 2020. https://www.statista.com/statistics/264810/number-of-monthly-active-facebook-users-worldwide/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Paul Costa and Robert McCrae. 2008. The revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R). The SAGE Handbook of Personality Theory and Assessment, Vol. 2 (1 2008), 179--198. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849200479.n9Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Jenny Davis. 2012. The Problem with Internet Addiction.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Andy Dearden, Ann Light, Susan Dray, John Thomas, Mike Best, Celeste Buckhalter, Dan Greenblatt, Gaurishankar Krishnan, and Nithya Sambasivan. 2007. User Centered Design and International Development. In CHI '07 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2825--2828. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240866.1241087Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Michela Del Vicario, Alessandro Bessi, Fabiana Zollo, Fabio Petroni, Antonio Scala, Guido Caldarelli, H Eugene Stanley, and Walter Quattrociocchi. 2016. The spreading of misinformation online. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 113, 3 (2016), 554--559.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Michael A. DeVito, Ashley Marie Walker, and Jeremy Birnholtz. 2018. 'Too Gay for Facebook ': Presenting LGBTQ+ Identity Throughout the Personal Social Media Ecosystem. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., Vol. 2, CSCW (Nov. 2018), 44:1--44:23. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274313Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Tobias Dienlin and Miriam J Metzger. 2016. An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for SNSs: Analyzing Self-Disclosure and Self-Withdrawal in a Representative U.S. Sample. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 21, 5 (8 2016), 368--383. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12163Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Tamara Dinev and Paul Hart. 2006. An extended privacy calculus model for e-commerce transactions. Information systems research, Vol. 17, 1 (2006), 61--80.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Nicole B. Ellison, Charles Steinfield, and Cliff Lampe. 2007. The benefits of facebook "friends:" Social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 12, 4 (2007), 1143--1168. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083--6101.2007.00367.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Federal Trade Commission. [n. d.]. Background Checks : What Job Applicants and Employees Should Know. https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/publications/background_checks_employees.cfm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Tom Fawcett. 2006. An introduction to ROC analysis. Pattern Recognition Letters, Vol. 27, 8 (6 2006), 861--874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2005.10.010Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Jesse Fox and Jennifer J. Moreland. 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, Vol. 45 (2015), 168--176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.083Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Shaun Gallagher. 2007. The Natural Philosophy of Agency. Philosophy Compass, Vol. 2, 2 (March 2007), 347--357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747--9991.2007.00067.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Shaun Gallagher. 2012. Multiple Aspects in the Sense of Agency. New Ideas in Psychology, Vol. 30, 1 (April 2012), 15--31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2010.03.003Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Samuel D. Gosling, Peter J. Rentfrow, and William B. Swann Jr. 2003. A Very Brief Measure of the Big -Five Personality Domains. Journal of Research in Personality, Vol. 37, 6 (Dec. 2003), 504--528. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092--6566(03)00046--1Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Jon E. Grant, Marc N. Potenza, Aviv Weinstein, and David A. Gorelick. 2010. Introduction to Behavioral Addictions. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, Vol. 36, 5 (Aug. 2010), 233--241. https://doi.org/10.3109/00952990.2010.491884Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Jeniffer Grasz. 2014. Number of Employers Passing on Applicants Due to Social Media Posts Continues to Rise, According to New CareerBuilder Survey - CareerBuilder. http://www.careerbuilder.com/share/aboutus/pressreleasesdetail.aspx'sd=6%2F26%2F2014&id=pr829&ed=12%2F31%2F2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. William G Graziano, Meara M Habashi, Brad E Sheese, and Renée M Tobin. 2007. Agreeableness, empathy, and helping: A person × situation perspective., 583--599 pages. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022--3514.93.4.583Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Mark D. Griffiths. 2012. Facebook addiction: Concerns, criticism, and Recommendations-a RESPONSE to Andreassen and colleagues. Psychological Reports, Vol. 110, 2 (2012), 518--520. https://doi.org/10.2466/01.07.18.PR0.110.2.518--520Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Mark D. Griffiths. 2013. Social Networking Addiction : Emerging Themes and Issues. Journal of Addiction Research & Therapy, Vol. 4, 5 (2013). https://doi.org/10.4172/2155--6105.1000e118Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Jonathan Grudin. 1988. Why CSCW Applications Fail: Problems in the Design and Evaluationof Organizational Interfaces. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW ). ACM, Portland, OR, 85--93. https://doi.org/10.1145/62266.62273Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Jonathan Grudin and Leysia Palen. 1995. Why Groupware Succeeds : Discretion or Mandate ?. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer -Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW ). Springer, Dordrecht, 263--278. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1007/978--94-011-0349--7_17Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Shion Guha, Eric P. S. Baumer, and Geri K. Gay. 2018. Regrets, I 've Had a Few : When Regretful Experiences Do (and Don 't) Compel Users to Leave Facebook. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Supporting Group Work (GROUP ). ACM, Sanibel Island, FL, 166--177. https://doi.org/10.1145/3148330.3148338Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Eszter Hargittai. 2008. Whose Space - Differences Among Users and Non -Users of Social Network Sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 13, 1 (2008), 276--297. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083--6101.2007.00396.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Ellie Harmon and Melissa Mazmanian. 2013. Stories of the Smartphone in Everyday Discourse : Conflict, Tension & Instability. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ). Paris, 1051--1060. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466134Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Julia M. Hormes, Brianna Kearns, and C. Alix Timko. 2014. Craving Facebook - Behavioral Addiction to Online Social Networking and Its Association with Emotion Regulation Deficits. Addiction, Vol. 109, 12 (Dec. 2014), 2079--2088. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.12713Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. N. Japkowicz and S. Stephen. 2002. The class imbalance problem: A systematic study. Intelligent data analysis, Vol. 6, 5 (2002), 429--449.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. O. P. John, E. M. Donahue, and R. L. Kentle. 1991. The Big Five Inventory - Versions 4a and 54. Technical Report. University of California Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research, Berkeley, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. O. P. John, L. P. Naumann, and C. J. Soto. 2008. Paradigm Shift to the Integrative Big-Five Trait Taxonomy: History, Measurement, and Conceptual Issues. In Handbook of personality: Theory and research, O. P. John, R. W. Robins, and L. A. Pervin (Eds.). Guilford Press, New York, NY, 114--158.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Mohammed Khalilia, Sounak Chakraborty, and Mihail Popescu. 2011. Predicting disease risks from highly imbalanced data using random forest. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, Vol. 11, 1 (2011), 51. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472--6947--11--51Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Kagan Kircaburun. 2016. Effects of Gender and Personality Differences on Twitter Addiction among Turkish Undergraduates. Journal of Education and Practice, Vol. 7, 24 (2016), 33--42.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Kagan Kircaburun and Mark D Griffiths. 2018. Instagram addiction and the Big Five of personality: The mediating role of self-liking. Journal of Behavioral Addictions J Behav Addict, Vol. 7, 1 (2018), 158--170. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.7.2018.15Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Sotiris Kotsiantis, Dimitris Kanellopoulos, and Panayiotis Pintelas. 2006. Handling imbalanced datasets: A review. GESTS International Transactions on Computer Science and Engineering, Vol. 30 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1.1.96.9248Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Grace Chi En Kwan and Marko M Skoric. 2013. Facebook bullying: An extension of battles in school. Computers in human behavior, Vol. 29, 1 (2013), 16--25.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Dominik J. Leiner, Lara Kobilke, Christina Rueß, and Hans Bernd Brosius. 2018. Functional domains of social media platforms: Structuring the uses of Facebook to better understand its gratifications. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 83 (2018), 194--203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.01.042Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Nicole Lindsey. 2019. FTC Facebook Investigation Could Hold Mark Zuckerberg Personally Accountable for Privacy Issues - CPO Magazine. https://www.cpomagazine.com/data-privacy/ftc-facebook-investigation-could-hold-mark-zuckerberg-personally-accountable-for-privacy-issues/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Kai Lukoff, Cissy Yu, Julie Kientz, and Alexis Hiniker. 2018. What Makes Smartphone Use Meaningful or Meaningless - Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol., Vol. 2, 1 (March 2018), 22:1--22:26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3191754Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Nicola Lunardon, Giovanna Menardi, and Nicola Torelli. 2014. ROSE: A package for binary imbalanced learning. R Journal, Vol. 6, 1 (2014), 79--89.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. Ulrik Lyngs, Kai Lukoff, Petr Slovak, Reuben Binns, Adam Slack, Michael Inzlicht, Max Van Kleek, and Nigel Shadbolt. 2019. Self-Control in Cyberspace : Applying Dual Systems Theory to a Review of Digital Self -Control Tools. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ). ACM, Glasgow, 131:1--131:18. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300361Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Marketing Charts. 2019. Facebook's Popularity Continues to Drop Among US Youth. What Are Zuckerberg's Plans? https://www.marketingcharts.com/digital/social-media-107791Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Giovanna Menardi and Nicola Torelli. 2014. Training and assessing classification rules with imbalanced data. Vol. 28. 92--122 pages. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10618-012-0295--5Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Wanda J. Orlikowski. 1992. Learning from Notes: Organizational Issues in Groupware Implementation. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW ). ACM, Toronto, ON, 362--369. https://doi.org/10.1145/143457.143549Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Art B. Owen. 2007. Infinitely imbalanced logistic regression. Journal of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 8 (2007), 761--773.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. Xinru Page, Pamela Wisniewski, Bart P. Knijnenburg, and Moses Namara. 2018. Social media's have-nots: an era of social disenfranchisement. Internet Research, Vol. 28, 5 (2018), 1253--1274. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-03--2017-0123Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  62. Andrew Perrin and Monica Anderson. 2019. Share of U .S. Adults Using Social Media, Including Facebook, Is Mostly Unchanged since 2018. Technical Report. Pew Research Center, Washington, D.C.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Pew Research Center. 2018. Demographics of Internet and Home Broadband Usage in the United States | Pew Research Center. https://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/internet-broadband/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Ethan R. Plaut. 2015. Technologies of Avoidance: The Swear Jar and the Cell Phone. First Monday, Vol. 20, 11 (2015). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v20i11.6295Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Laura Portwood-Stacer. 2012. How We Talk About Media Refusal, Part 1: “Addiction ”. Flow, Vol. 16, 3 (2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Laura Portwood-Stacer. 2014. Care Work and the Stakes of Social Media Refusal. http://www.newcriticals.com/care-work-and-the-stakes-of-social-media-refusal/printGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Marnie E. Rice and Grant T. Harris. 2005. Comparing effect sizes in follow-up studies: ROC area, Cohen's d, and r. Law and Human Behavior, Vol. 29, 5 (2005), 615--620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-005--6832--7Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  68. Diana Rodriguez. 2019. Government and Industry Are Scanning Social Media for Keywords -- Make Good Choices. https://news.clearancejobs.com/2019/09/04/government-and-industry-are-scanning-social-media-for-keywords-make-good-choices/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Kaleigh Rogers. 2018. Let's Talk About Mark Zuckerberg's Claim that Facebook 'Doesn't Sell Data' .Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. Christine Satchell and Paul Dourish. 2009. Beyond the user: Use and Non-Use in HCI. In OZCHI 2009. Melbourne, Australia. https://doi.org/10.1145/1738826.1738829Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  71. Sarita Yardi Schoenebeck. 2014. Giving up Twitter for Lent : How and Why We Take Breaks from Social Media. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ). Toronto, ON, 773--782. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2556983Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  72. Madeline E. Smith, Duyen T. Nguyen, Charles Lai, Gilly Leshed, and Eric P.S. Baumer. 2012. Going to College and Staying Connected : Communication Between College Freshmen and Their Parents. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW ). ACM, Seattle, WA, 789--798. https://doi.org/10.1145/2145204.2145322Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Adam Tapal, Ela Oren, Reuven Dar, and Baruch Eitam. 2017. The sense of agency scale: A measure of consciously perceived control over one's mind, body, and the immediate environment. Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 8, SEP (2017), 1--11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01552Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  74. The Guardian. [n. d.]. Facebook under fire for 'censoring' Kashmir-related posts and accounts | Technology. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/19/facebook-under-fire-censoring-kashmir-posts-accountsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. Jonathan A. Tran, Katie S. Yang, Katie Davis, and Alexis Hiniker. 2019. Modeling the Engagement -Disengagement Cycle of Compulsive Phone Use. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ). ACM, Glasgow, 312:1--312:14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300542Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. Sherry Turkle. 2017. Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. Hachette UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. Johan Ugander, Lars Backstrom, Cameron Marlow, and Jon Kleinberg. 2012. Structural diversity in social contagion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 109, 16 (4 2012), 5962 LP -- 5966. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1116502109Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  78. Viswanath Venkatesh, Michael G Morris, Gordon B Davis, and Fred D Davis. 2003. User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27, 3 (1 2003), 425--478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  79. Richard G. Wilkinson. 2002. Unhealthy Societies 1 ed.). Routledge, London, UK. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203421680Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  80. Pamela Wisniewski, Heng Xu, and Yunan Chen. 2014. Understanding User Adaptation Strategies for the Launching of Facebook Timeline. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). ACM, Toronto, ON, 2421--2430. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557363Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  81. Sally Wyatt. 2003. Non-users also matter. The construction of users and non-users of the internet. In How users matter. The co-construction of users and technologies. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 67--80. https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.2006.0041Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  82. Susan Wyche and Eric P. S. Baumer. 2016. Imagined Facebook : An Exploratory Study of Non-Users Perceptions of Social Media in Rural Zambia. New Media & Society (2016). https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815625948Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  83. Susan P. Wyche, Sarita Yardi Schoenebeck, and Andrea Forte. 2013. “Facebook Is a Luxury ”: An Exploratory Study of Social Media Use in Rural Kenya. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW). San Antonio, TX, 33--43. https://doi.org/10.1145/2441776.2441783Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  84. Sunkyung Yoon, Mary Kleinman, Jessica Mertz, and Michael Brannick. 2019. Is social network site usage related to depression? A meta-analysis of Facebook--depression relations. Journal of affective disorders, Vol. 248 (2019), 65--72.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Who has a Choice?: Survey-Based Predictors of Volitionality in Facebook Use and Non-use

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
          Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction  Volume 5, Issue GROUP
          GROUP
          July 2021
          190 pages
          EISSN:2573-0142
          DOI:10.1145/3475950
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2021 ACM

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 13 July 2021
          Published in pacmhci Volume 5, Issue GROUP

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader
        About Cookies On This Site

        We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

        Learn more

        Got it!