Content uploaded by Matti Mäntymäki
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Matti Mäntymäki on Aug 12, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
1
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
THE JANUS FACE OF FACEBOOK:
POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE SIDES OF SOCIAL
NETWORKING SITE USE
Abstract
There is an increasing awareness that social networking site (SNS) use includes a socio-psychologically
positive and a negative side. However, research remains largely silent on which side dominates in
driving SNS use. To address this gap and to better understand the nature of SNSs we examine the
positive and negative drivers of SNS use in parallel. We draw on the uses and gratifications theory and
place social enhancement and interpersonal connectivity as the socio-psychologically positive
gratifications and exhibitionism and voyeurism as the adverse gratifications predicting SNS use. We
further link these gratifications to two key psychological needs, namely self-presentation and the need
to belong. We conceptualize our dependent variable, SNS use, as a multi-dimensional second-order
construct that consists of content production, content consumption, amount of usage, and
comprehensiveness of one’s profile information. We use longitudinal data from Facebook users to test
our research model. The results show that exhibitionism, voyeurism and interpersonal connectivity
predict SNS use. Furthermore, the number of friends in the SNS decreases the effect of exhibitionism
and increases the effect of social enhancement. Altogether, the role of exhibitionism and voyeurism in
predicting SNS use underscores the need for increased awareness of the socio-psychologically dark side
of SNSs.
Keywords: Social networking sites, Self-presentation, Voyeurism, Exhibitionism, Facebook, Social
media
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
2
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
1 Introduction
Social networking site (SNS) use has been attributed to a wide range of negative and positive socio-
psychological phenomena (Fox and Moreland 2015; Turkle 2012). For instance, SNS use has been
related to socially adverse phenomena such as narcissism (Carpenter 2012; Panek et al. 2013) and
psychopathy (Garcia and Sikström 2014). In addition, research has attributed SNS use to less extreme
yet still negative or socially undesirable phenomena such as the fear of missing out (Przybylski et al.
2013) and romantic jealousy (Utz and Beukeboom 2011). On the positive side, research has reported
SNS use intensity increases social capital (Ellison et al. 2007; Steinfield et al. 2008), i.e. the benefits
people receive from interactions with other people. SNSs also offer an immediate access to friends for
organizing social activities and distributing information (Xu et al. 2012). As a result, from a socio-
psychological perspective both desirable and undesirable factors seem to drive SNS use.
While both positive and negative aspects of SNS use have been discussed in the literature, very few
studies (Fox and Moreland 2015; Turel and Serenko 2012) have examined them in parallel. Fox and
Moreland (2015) examined the negative and positive side of the affordances of Facebook. Turel and
Serenko’s (2012) study on the duality of enjoyment found that enjoyment predicts both high engagement
and habit, which in turn contributes to addiction. By and large, understanding of the underlying socio-
psychological mechanisms contributing to these dualities related to SNS remains nevertheless nascent.
Addressing this gap is important to gain a more balanced understanding of the motives behind SNS use
and to more accurately predict SNS user behavior.
Against this backdrop, we examine the Janus
1
face, i.e. the positive and negative determinants of SNS
use. The widespread adoption of SNSs can be explained by the fact that SNS use helps to satisfy two
key psychological needs: the need for self-presentation and the need to belong (Nadkarni and Hofmann
1
In ancient Roman religion, Janus is the god of transitions, beginnings, and doorways. Janus is depicted as having two faces
that look backwards and forwards.
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
3
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
2012; Seidman 2013). By drawing on the uses and gratifications (UGT) theory, we argue that SNS use
offers features enabling both socio-psychologically positive and dysfunctional gratifications that can
fulfill the need for self-presentation and the need to belong.
With respect to the positive side of SNS use, engagement in SNSs can help to build and communicate
the self to other people (Nadkarni and Hofmann 2012; Seidman 2013). Second, SNSs help their users
to interact with other people and stay informed about other people's lives in order to maintain social
relationships (Cheung et al. 2011). To this end, SNS use can support socio-psychologically positive
behaviors such as self-promotion (Belk 2013; McAndrew and Jeong 2012) and self-disclosure
(Hollenbaugh and Ferris 2014).
On the negative side, self-presentation on a SNS can be related to exhibitionism (Wang and Stefanone
2013) and narcissism (Mehdizadeh 2010; Panek et al. 2013; Ryan and Xenos 2011). In addition,
following other users on SNSs without the aim of maintaining or developing relationships can be a form
of social surveillance (Lampe et al. 2006; Marwick 2012; Tokunaga 2011a) or even voyeurism
(Mäntymäki and Islam 2014). As a result, we investigate social enhancement and interpersonal
connectivity alongside exhibitionism and voyeurism as the two faces of SNS use.
In addition, the concept of SNS use is multi-faceted (Smock et al. 2011) and thus it requires a
conceptualization that goes beyond the amount of usage. In SNSs, the user has a dual role as one
produces content both for oneself and for the other users, and consumes the content produced by other
users. Finally, SNSs provide the option to add different information, i.e., work history, political views,
relationship status, family information, etc. to one’s profile. Consequently, we conceptualize SNS use
as a multi-dimensional second order construct comprising content production, content consumption, the
amount of usage, and the comprehensiveness of the profile information.
We test our research model with longitudinal data collected from 191 Facebook users. The results show
that exhibitionism is the chief predictor of SNS use, followed by interpersonal connectivity and
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
4
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
voyeurism while social enhancement had no effect. This implies that although both positive and negative
determinants predict SNS use, exhibitionism, i.e. narcissistic self-promotion, is the main predictor of
SNS use.
This study makes two principal contributions. First, by examining the positive and negative predictors
of SNS use in parallel, our study offers a more balanced understanding of SNS use (Pempek et al. 2009;
Smock et al. 2011; Steinfield et al. 2008) but also advances knowledge about the duality of IT use in a
broader sense (Turel & Serenko, 2012). Thus, the study contributes to the growing body of information
systems (IS) research that investigates the desirable and undesirable drivers of IT use (Beaudry and
Pinsonneault 2010; Zhang 2013).
Second, by employing a richer measurement of SNS use, this study contributes to the understanding of
the context-specific conceptualization and measurement of IT use (Burton-Jones and Straub 2006; Sun
and Teng 2012) in the SNS context (Aladwani 2014). From a contextual perspective, SNSs have
introduced another level of social complexity to IT use as they involve producing and consuming social
information among interconnected users as their central artefact (Krasnova et al. 2015). As a result, this
study has relevance for the academic community, governmental decision makers, and SNS providers to
better understand the possible desirable (Ellison et al. 2007; Oh et al. 2014; Valenzuela et al. 2009) and
undesirable drivers of SNS use (Krasnova et al. 2015).
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: after this introductory section we present the
theoretical underpinnings of the study. In the third section, we develop the research hypotheses. The
fourth section contains the empirical research and results. Section five concludes the paper by presenting
the key findings and their implication for theory and practice as well as unveiling the limitations of the
study and suggesting areas for further research.
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
5
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
2 Background
UGT (Blumler 1979; Katz et al. 1974; Katz et al. 1973) has been widely used in communications
research to explain why people choose and use new media (Stafford et al. 2004) such as social
networking sites (Cheung et al. 2011; Joinson 2008; Park et al. 2009; Raacke and Bonds-Raacke 2008).
According to UGT, the gratifications are closely linked to the nature of the communication medium
(Blumler 1979). UGT research today views media users not as a passive audience, but as people who
have an active role in integrating their media use into their lives (Ruggiero 2000). Rather than providing
a predefined set of factors and constructs, UGT provides a guiding logic for building the nomological
net of the research.
UGT aligns with motivation theories (Lawler and Porter 1967) by viewing media use as being driven
by valued outcomes, i.e. gratifications. Thus, the gratifications stem from the satisfaction of
psychological needs (Deci and Ryan 2000; Maslow 1954) but can vary across individuals depending on
their context, competences and objectives. As a result, the UGT lens offers an explanation as to why the
fulfillment of psychological needs, such as self-presentation (Seidman 2013) and the need to belong
(Baumeister & Leary 1995), can be attributed to both the positive and undesirable socio-psychological
gratifications that drive SNS use.
Against this backdrop, social enhancement and exhibitionism represent the positive and adverse sides
of self-presentation on SNSs. Similarly, interpersonal connectivity and voyeurism depict the socially
positive and dysfunctional gratifications derived from SNS use that aim to fulfill the need to belong.
Examining exhibitionism and voyeurism in parallel is meaningful because of the mutual dependency
between voyeurs and exhibitionists (Calvert 2009) and the dual role of SNS users as content producers
and content consumers (e.g. Mäntymäki & Islam 2014). In the SNS context, exhibitionism requires
content production and typically self-disclosure whereas voyeurism represents the consumption side of
SNS use. Self-disclosure on a SNS increases the amount of information about a person available via the
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
6
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
SNS. This in turn adds to the voyeuristic value of the service. As stated by Steinfield et al. (2008),
"[F]eatures within the site make it easier for users both to broadcast information about their own
activities and to engage in a form of social surveillance wherein they can track the activities of a wide
set of Facebook Friends."
The focal constructs of the study are defined in Table 1 below and discussed in detail in the following
section.
Construct
Definition
Reference
Social enhancement
Value derived from socially acceptable self-promotion on
an SNS.
(Dholakia et al.
2004)
Exhibitionism
Narcissistic self-promotion on an SNS.
(Ames et al.
2006)
Interpersonal
connectivity
Value derived from establishing and maintaining contact
with other people such as social support, friendship, and
intimacy via the SNS.
(Dholakia et al.
2004)
Voyeurism
Tendency to derive psychological value by accessing the
private details of others through a SNS.
(Metzl 2004)
Table 1. Focal constructs and their definitions
3 Research Model and Hypotheses
3.1 Conceptualizing SNS use
To incorporate the key aspects of the SNS context in our conceptualization of SNS use, we measure
SNS use as a second order formative construct using four components. The first component is content
production, which takes place when users update their status, post photos, put comments/likes on others’
posts, and tag friends in their photos. Prior research has labeled these activities as directed
communication or active participation (Koroleva et al. 2011). The second component is content
consumption, which takes place when users browse their news feed to follow what their friends post and
proactively check both friends’ and others’ profiles. In prior SNS research this form of usage has been
referred to as passive following (Krasnova et al. 2013), social searching or social browsing (Wise et al.
2010) as well as social surveillance (Tokunaga 2011a). The third component of SNS use is extent of use
measured by the amount of time spent on the SNS. The final component is the comprehensiveness of
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
7
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
profile information that depicts the degree of self-disclosure in one’s profile. Overall, with this approach,
we follow the suggestion of Burton-Jones and Straub (2006), who have called for richer
conceptualizations of IT usage.
3.2 Social Enhancement
People have a need to belong (Baumeister and Leary 1995), i.e. to feel connected to others to love and
care and to be loved and cared for (Deci and Ryan 2000). A prerequisite for belonging to groups or
establishing relationships with other people is to be seen and recognized by others. Thus, self-
presentation is motivated by the need to belong (Tice and Faber 2001). In the SNS context, an important
form of self-presentation is self-disclosure (Choi and Bazarova In Press; Krasnova et al. 2010), i.e. the
process of making oneself known to others (Jourard and Lasakow 1958, p. 91). By using the features of
SNSs, users can share their positive life events, such as holiday experiences as well as career or sport
achievements, and hence gain recognition and acceptance from their social network in the SNS.
People generally want to see themselves and be seen by others in a positive light, thus they employ
different strategies to enhance their social image (Horvath and Morf 2010), which makes self-promotion
an important part of self-presentation. However, presenting oneself in a maximally favorable light can
be counterproductive due to losing one's face if the claims become discredited and because highly
favorable statements about oneself can be considered arrogant (Tice and Faber 2001).
Consequently, people tend to discount their negative traits when presenting themselves to others, which
is considered a more socially acceptable behavior than augmenting positive traits, which is a
characteristic of a narcissistic personality (Horvath and Morf 2010). As a result, we conceptualize social
enhancement as the value derived from socially acceptable self-promotion on a SNS. This value can be
derived from gaining acceptance and approval from other SNS users, and enhancing one's social status
within his/her community (Dholakia et al. 2004).
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
8
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
SNSs are venues for building social identity (Kwon and Wen 2010) and impression management (Hall
et al. 2014). According to Utz (2010), an early impression of a person is formed through digital
mediation. The online information is particularly important for new acquaintances who do not have
access to offline information with which to form impressions. Thus, people actively engage in SNS
activities to create, maintain and enhance their image (Gonzales and Hancock 2008; Ku et al. 2013).
Seeking recognition from other people has also been found to be one of the driving forces behind joining
virtual communities (Bagozzi and Dholakia 2002; Dholakia et al. 2004) and using SNSs (Cheung et al.
2011). This implies that increased social enhancement is likely to lead to the increased use of SNSs.
H1: Social enhancement will positively affect SNS use.
3.3 Exhibitionism
While social enhancement represents a positive and socially accepted form of self-promotion,
exhibitionism is considered a socio-psychologically dysfunctional form of self-promotion that does not
support fulfilling the need for relatedness by developing and maintaining interpersonal relationships (see
e.g. Joinson et al. 2008). Instead, exhibitionism is a narcissistic tendency (Ames et al. 2006; Brunell et
al. 2011; Carpenter 2012) manifested by building an overly desirable self-image in order to demonstrate
superiority and to seek admiration from others in order to support the fragile self (Morf and Rhodewalt
2001). Hence, exhibitionism is considered a first-order component of a narcissistic personality (Ames
et al. 2006; Raskin and Terry 1988). However, as a psychological trait in the general population,
exhibitionism is not overtly negative or harmful, unlike other dimensions of narcissism, such as the
manipulation of others, or hostility
2
. Rather, exhibitionism indicates extraversion and low impulse
control (Panek et al. 2013).
2
In psychiatry, the most extreme forms of exhibitionism are characterized by sexuality and compulsiveness and are thus
considered conditions that require psychiatric treatment (DSM-IV 1994).
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
9
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
We conceptualize exhibitionism as narcissistic self-promotion on a SNS. Compared to social
enhancement, which is self-promotion enacted within socially accepted boundaries (Horvath and Morf
2010), exhibitionism is characterized by grandiose self-promotion to garner admiration from others,
even under circumstances where this self-promotion is perceived as negative. Due to this grandiose self-
promotion, exhibitionism increases the risk of losing the audience it is aimed at (Morf and Rhodewalt
2001).
The SNS context facilitates exhibitionism by providing the tools and audience for self-promotion (Wang
and Stefanone 2013). SNS use offers a venue for seeking reaffirmation from others and hence helping
to keep away negative feelings such as shame and worthlessness that characterize a fragile self (Horvath
and Morf 2010; Mehdizadeh 2010). Hence, it is plausible to assume exhibitionism motivates posting
content and engaging in self-disclosure on SNSs.
The prior research has found exhibitionism to be positively related to a high amount of self-disclosure
(Hollenbaugh and Ferris 2014) and check-in intensity (Wang and Stefanone 2013) as well as to predict
self-promotion in the SNS context (Carpenter 2012). As a result, we place exhibitionism as a predictor
of SNS use.
H2: Exhibitionism will positively affect SNS use.
3.4 Interpersonal connectivity
People use SNSs to obtain information about other people (Lampe et al. 2006). This helps in maintaining
interpersonal relationships (Seidman 2013) and ultimately contributes to fulfilling their need to belong
(Baumeister and Leary 1995). Several studies have shown that people interact online and in SNSs
(Sheldon et al. 2011) to meet like-minded others as well as to receive companionship and social support
(Kraut et al. 1998; McKenna and Bargh 1999; Wellman and Gulia 1999). As a result, we employ the
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
10
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
concept of interpersonal connectivity, which refers to the value derived from establishing and
maintaining contact with other people through a SNS (Dholakia et al. 2004), as a predictor of SNS use.
Prior research has reported that people use SNSs for social interaction and communication (Ku et al.
2013; Pempek et al. 2009; Xu et al. 2012) to connect with other people (Ellison et al. 2007; Nadkarni
and Hofmann 2012; Raacke and Bonds-Raacke 2008). The literature also suggests that the large-scale
mobilization in Facebook has been driven by the opportunity to connect and to communicate with people
one has met or befriended offline (Ellison et al. 2007; Joinson et al. 2008; Lampe et al. 2006). Thus, by
helping users to interact with other people (Grieve et al. 2013; Sheldon et al. 2011), SNS use contributes
to satisfying the need to belong. As a result, we hold that the value stemming from staying in touch with
other people is likely to predict SNS use.
H2: Interpersonal connectivity will positively affect SNS use
3.5 Voyeurism
SNSs can be used to look at other people, known or unknown, without an aim to maintain or establish a
relationship or attachment with them. Prior research has reported that people use SNSs to look for
information about others (Antheunis et al. 2010) and to stay updated on what is happening in their social
circle (Junco 2012). Pempek et al. (2009) found that lurking, i.e. following other users without engaging
with them, is a common activity that students engage in on Facebook. Furthermore, Lyndon et al. (2011)
demonstrated how people use Facebook to cyberstalk their ex-partners. As a result, prior research has
also attributed the use of a SNS as way to obtain information about other people through social
surveillance (Albrechtslund 2008; Zhang et al. 2011) and voyeurism (Mäntymäki and Islam 2014).
These observations align with media research on how people consume reality TV to fulfill their curiosity
about the private details of other people's lives (Baruh 2009; Baruh 2010; Nabi et al. 2003; Nabi et al.
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
11
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
2006). This mediated voyeurism (Bagdasarov et al. 2010; Baruh 2010; Calvert 2009) is a gratification
people seek from consuming reality TV (Baruh 2010).
Against this backdrop, we draw on Metzl (2004) and conceptualize voyeurism as a tendency to derive
psychological value by accessing private details via a SNS. Our conceptualization of voyeurism draws
on Lacan's (1998) psychoanalytic thinking that voyeurs look for what they cannot otherwise see.
Accordingly, voyeurism is a common personal trait that all "normal" individuals possess to different
degrees (Baruh 2010, p. 203). However, voyeurism is distinct from pure curiosity or seeking for
information that can also motivate people to use SNSs without contributing to the platform (Krasnova
et al. 2010).
As a result, it is highly conceivable that voyeurism is motivated by the avoidance of the psychological
risks of negative feelings and experiences that can result from interactions with other people and self-
disclosure on the SNS. According to Deci and Ryan (2000), this type of extrinsic motivation represents
an introjected form of behavioral regulation. Introjection refers to regulation by contingent self-esteem
(Deci & Ryan, 1995). A classic form of introjection is ego involvement (De Charms 1968; Nicholls
1984) in which people are motivated to demonstrate ability (or avoid failure) in order to maintain
feelings of worth. Following Deci & Ryan (2000), we further argue that voyeurism represents a deficit
of satisfying the need to belong. As a voyeur exhibits a strong interest in other people, voyeurism can
be viewed as a compensatory mechanism to fulfill the need to belong.
Previous research has found that social surveillance motivates SNS use (Albrechtslund 2008; Tokunaga
2011b). Furthermore, prior research offers evidence that accessing other people's lives through
electronic media, for example by consuming reality TV, can offer voyeuristic value (Bagdasarov et al.
2010; Baruh 2010; Nabi et al. 2003). Based on these considerations, we place voyeurism as a predictor
of SNS use and put forward the last hypothesis.
H4: Voyeurism will positively affect SNS use.
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
12
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
The overall research model is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. The Research model
4 Study design
4.1 Instrument development
We first reviewed the extant measures for SNS use (Chen et al. 2013; Smock et al. 2011). Based on the
review we concluded that the prior measures did not fully capture the dual role of a SNS user as a content
producer and consumer or the wide selection of activities available to users. Hence, we decided to
develop the items measuring SNS use and chose to focus contextually on Facebook since it is the most
widely used SNS.
We started the measurement development for SNS use by asking ten Facebook users to elaborate on
their activities in the platform. Five respondents were recruited from the authors' extended Facebook
Positive side
H4
H3
H1
H2
Social
enhancement
Interpersonal
connectivity
Exhibtionism
Voyeurism
Content
production
Content
consumption
Amount of
use
Comprehensive-
ness of profile
information
SNS use
(2nd order
construct)
Controls: Age, Gender, Number of friends in the SNS, Education level
Negative side
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
13
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
network and five were PhD students. We asked the respondents to freely describe their typical Facebook
usage session and the things they typically do on the platform.
We then set up an expert panel to discuss the tangible uses of Facebook. The panel comprised of four
IS faculty members and four PhD students at a Finnish university, everyone had first-hand experience
of Facebook as well other SNSs. The panel was established as an invitation-only Facebook group. The
main reason for using Facebook was that it assisted the panel members to see each other’s comments
and enabled them to participate in the discussion. In addition to the discussion on their SNS use, we
asked the panel members to describe their own use of Facebook in detail.
Based on the review of prior measures garnered from the literature, plus the feedback received from the
user group and the expert panel, we established a pool of 22 candidate items (Clark and Watson 1995).
The list was thereafter sent to a subgroup of the expert panel for comments and revisions. After that
stage, several items were revised and removed.
A final list of 13 items covering typical user activities on Facebook was presented to three senior IS
scholars for further comments and revisions. After this stage, some minor rewordings were made. The
items measuring content consumption and content production were placed on a five-point frequency
scale, using adverbs of frequency that were deemed to indicate approximately equal intervals in the
measurement literature: never, seldom, sometimes, often, and very often (Schriesheim and Schriesheim
1978).
To measure the comprehensiveness of the profile information, we asked the respondents to mark the
items such as relationship status, movies, music and political views that they have included in their
Facebook profiles. Then we calculated the sum of items to form a score for each respondent. Amount
of use was measured by asking how many times a day the respondents visit Facebook with i) a computer,
ii) a mobile phone, and iii) a tablet device, and the average duration of the visit for each device. Based
on this information, we calculated the total usage time per day.
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
14
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
The measures for social enhancement, exhibitionism, interpersonal connectivity and voyeurism were
adopted from existing scales. The items were measured on a five-point Likert scale. All constructs were
measured with reflective indicators.
Finally, we included the social desirability scale from Reynolds (1982) in the survey, since people tend
to under-report negative phenomena. We sought to control empirically for whether the responses to
items measuring voyeurism and exhibitionism are subject to social desirability bias (SDB), which was
measured on a dichotomous scale (true/false). Appendix A contains the measurement items with
references to the respective literature.
4.2 Data collection
We collected the empirical data using a two-phase online survey with a two-month gap between the
phases. Invitations to participate in the research were sent to 1,500 individuals randomly selected from
the database of a major Finnish university. The pool of invited respondents consisted of bachelor, master
and PhD students as well as graduates who have enrolled to study part-time or to take complementary
courses.
In the first phase, we received 289 usable responses, equaling a response rate of 19.27 percent. Two
months later, we invited the respondents to complete a second questionnaire that included the same
questions except for the demographic profile. In the second stage, we received 191 usable responses.
We used data from stage 1 to measure the independent variables and data from stage 2 to measure the
dependent variables as well as the possible social desirability bias.
The respondents’ demographic features are presented in Table 2 and the data collection process in Figure
2.
Frequency
Percentage
Gender
Male
56
70.7
Female
135
29.3
Age
15-20 years
20
10.5
>20–25 years
96
50.3
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
15
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
>25–30 years
56
29.3
>30 years
19
9.9
Highest level of education
completed
Vocational training
6
3.1
Upper secondary school
103
53.9
College degree
11
5.8
Bachelor’s degree
55
28.8
Master’s degree
16
8.4
Table 2. Demographics of the respondents
To investigate possible non-respondent bias, we ran a series of independent sample t-tests. The
respondents were first divided into two groups based on the median date of the completion of the survey,
and their responses on the constructs were then compared (Armstrong and Overton 1977). The tests did
not reveal any statistically significant differences between the early and late responses, supporting the
notion that non-response bias was not a major concern in our study.
Figure 2. Data collection phases
4.3 Data analysis
The analysis utilized the partial least squares (PLS) approach with SmartPLS software (Ringle et al.
2005). Goodhue et al. (2012) have shown that PLS performed as effectively as covariance-based
structural equation modeling in detecting actual paths, and not falsely detecting non-existent paths.
According to Hair et al. (2011), PLS is particularly suitable when the goal is to predict key target
constructs or identify the key driver constructs, whereas covariance-based structural modeling is more
appropriate for theory testing, theory confirmation, or the comparison of alternative theories. Hence,
PLS is well-suited to this study as the goal is to identify the key drivers of SNS use.
Constructs from time
T1 measurement
Exhibitionism
Voyeurism
Social enhancement
Interpersonal connectivity
Age
Gender
Education
Number of friends in the
SNS
Constructs from time T2
measurement
Content production
Content consumption
Amount of usage
Comprehensiveness of profile
information
Social desirability bias
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
16
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
A rule of thumb for the required sample size in PLS is that the sample should be at least ten times that
of the most complicated multiple regressions in the model (Barclay et al. 1995; Hair et al. 2011). The
sample size here fulfills this criterion well.
We followed Gefen and Straub’s (2005) procedure to test convergent and discriminant validity.
Convergent validity indicates the extent to which the items of a scale that are theoretically related are
also related in reality. We evaluated the convergent validity by examining item loadings, composite
reliabilities and average variance extracted (AVE) values. With regard to item loadings, Fornell and
Larcker (1981) have recommended that the values should be at least 0.7 to be acceptable. As shown in
Appendix B, all items except CC5, CC6, CP6, and CP7 met this criterion. Thus, we decided to remove
these items from the respective scales. The composite reliabilities above 0.8 and AVE values exceeding
0.5 further support the finding that the convergent validity was satisfactory (Fornell and Larcker 1981).
Discriminant validity refers to whether the items measure the construct in question or other (related)
constructs. We evaluated the discriminant validity by comparing the square roots of the AVE values to
the inter-construct correlations (Fornell and Larcker 1981). Appendix C shows the correlation matrix
with the square root of AVE values presented diagonally. As can be seen from the table, the square root
of the AVE values for the variables are consistently greater than the off-diagonal correlation values,
suggesting satisfactory discriminant validity between the variables.
We further verified the discriminant validity by examining item cross-loadings. As Appendix D shows,
all items load higher on their assigned latent construct than any other construct (Fornell & Larcker,
1981). This indicates that discriminant validity on the item level is met for all the constructs (Gefen and
Straub 2005).
After having verified the convergent and discriminant validity of the measurement, we addressed the
potential concern for common method bias (CMB) (Podsakoff et al. 2008). To this end, we employed
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
17
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
Harman's (1976) one-factor test. A principal component analysis indicated no single construct accounts
for the majority of the total variance in either of datasets.
To further test the risk of common method bias, and to investigate whether the results have been biased
by social desirability, we followed the marker variable approach (Lindell & Whitney 2001), using social
desirability bias (SDB) (Reynolds 1982) as a marker variable. We assumed that SDB, which is external
to the model, can be negatively and weakly correlated with socially undesirable phenomena, such as
voyeurism and exhibitionism, but not with the other constructs. The highest correlation with SDB was
0.21 (with exhibitionism), and hence the shared variance was 0.04. As a result, we concluded that neither
CMB nor SDB has violated the results.
4.4 Results
With respect to our dependent variable, all first order constructs, content production (β = 0.54, p <
0.001), content consumption (β = 0.50, p < 0.001), the amount of use (β = 0.12, p < 0.001), and the
comprehensiveness of profile information (β = 0.17, p < 0.001) contributed significantly to the second
order construct, SNS use.
Exhibitionism (β = 0.34, p < 0.001) was the strongest predictor of SNS use, followed by interpersonal
connectivity (β = 0.26, p < 0.001) and voyeurism (β = 0.18, p < 0.01). Hence, H2, H3, and H4 were
supported. Social enhancement (β = -0.04, n.s.) had a non-significant effect on SNS use. Thus, H1 was
not supported by the data. With respect to the control variables, the number of friends (β = 0.30, p <
0.001) and gender (β = -0.09, p < 0.05) had a significant effect on SNS use, whereas age (β = 0.05, n.s.)
did not. Altogether, exhibitionism, interpersonal connectivity and voyeurism accounted for 51 per cent
of the variance in SNS use (see Fig. 3.)
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
18
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
Figure 3.. PLS results
4.5 Post hoc analysis
Contrary to our hypothesis, social enhancement did not have a significant effect on SNS use. To
investigate the issue in more detail, we decided to conduct a post hoc analysis and investigate the
potential moderating effects of the control variables. To test the moderating effects, we allowed all
control variables to interact with social enhancement, exhibitionism, interpersonal connectivity and
voyeurism.
The results from moderation test are presented in Table 3. The results show that the interaction terms of
social enhancement and number of friends (β = 0.15, p < 0.01); exhibitionism and number of friends (β
= -0.16, p < 0.01); exhibitionism and gender (β = 0.08, p < 0.05); interpersonal connectivity and gender
(β = 0.08, p < 0.05); exhibitionism and age (β = -0.11, p < 0.01) are significant. We then included these
significant paths in the research model to examine the change in predictive power. The R2 of the
extended model was 58%. A nested F-test confirmed that the R2 improvement compared to the direct
effects model was statistically significant (p < 0.01).
-0.04 n.s.
The Positive
side
0.30***
0.05 n.s.
-0.09*
0.18**
0.34***
0.26***
Social
enhancement
Interpersonal
connectivity
Exhibitionism
Voyeurism
Number of
friends in the
SNS
Gender Age
SNS use
(R2= 51.0 %)
Note: *: p < 0.05, **: p < 0.01, ***: p < 0.001, n.s.: non-significant
The Negative
side
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
19
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
Independent Variables
Model with direct
effects only
Model with interaction
terms
Social enhancement
-0.04
-0.002
Exhibitionism
0.34***
0.30***
Interpersonal connectivity
0.26***
0.24***
Voyeurism
0.18***
0.19***
Number of friends in the SNS
0.30***
0.22***
Gender
-0.09*
-0.08*
Age
0.05
0.07
Social enhancement*Number of friends in the SNS
0.15**
Exhibitionism*Number of friends
-0.16**
Interpersonal connectivity*Number of friends in the SNS
-0.005
Voyeurism*Number of friends in the SNS
-0.07
Social enhancement*Gender
-0.05
Exhibitionism*Gender
0.08*
Interpersonal connectivity*Gender
0.08*
Voyeurism*Gender
0.04
Social enhancement*Age
0.07
Exhibitionism*Age
-0.11**
Interpersonal connectivity*Age
-0.07
Voyeurism*Age
0.08
R2=0.51
R2=0.58
Note: *: p < 0.05, **: p < 0.01, ***: p < 0.001
Table 3. Summary of the testing of the moderating effects
The results from testing the moderating effects demonstrate that that the number of friends strengthens
the effect of social enhancement, but weakens that of exhibitionism on SNS use. This implies that users
who have a higher number of friends in the SNS follow a more socially accepted method of self-
promotion than those who have a smaller number of friends. The results further show that age decreases
the effect of exhibitionism, indicating that exhibitionism affects SNS use more among younger users.
Finally, the effect of interpersonal connectivity and exhibitionism on SNS use is stronger among male
respondents.
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
20
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
5 Discussion
5.1 Key findings
There are two key observations gained from the study. First, from the set of variables examined here,
exhibitionism was found to be the chief driver of SNS use. At the same time, social enhancement had
virtually no effect on SNS use. Interestingly, the analysis of moderating effects reveals that a high
number of friends decreases the effect of exhibitionism and increases the effect of social enhancement.
In other words, having a large number of friends in a SNS decreases the influence of narcissistic self-
promotion.
Second, with respect to the need to belong, both interpersonal connectivity and voyeurism drive SNS
use with roughly similar effects. This empirically corroborates our assertion that voyeuristic motives
can drive SNS use. With respect to interpersonal connectivity, our results, align with prior research
showing that maintaining existing relationships is the main reason for SNS use (Joinson et al. 2008;
Lampe et al. 2006).
5.2 Implications for theory
First, by examining the positive and negative gratifications stemming from fulfilling the need for self-
presentation and the need to belong, we contribute to the research on the dualities of SNS use (Fox and
Moreland 2015; Turel and Serenko 2012) as well as the dualities of IT use in general (Soror et al. 2015).
In particular, this study connects the gratifications derived from SNS use to key psychological needs.
Second, the present study is one the first to apply the concept of media voyeurism (Bagdasarov et al.
2010; Calvert 2009) in the SNS context. The fact that voyeuristic motives are a significant predictor of
SNS use extends the understanding of gratifications sought from SNSs.
Third, this study increases the understanding of self-promotion in the SNS setting. With respect to
exhibitionism, Panek et al. (2013) found a positive relationship between exhibitionism and posting
frequency on Facebook. Our study adds to this body of knowledge by demonstrating that exhibitionism
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
21
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
is the principal determinant of SNS use, whereas social enhancement has no effect. Thus, the narcissistic
side of self-promotion dominates in driving SNS use. Furthermore, our findings suggest that
exhibitionism affects SNS use in a broader sense than just by increasing posting frequency. Taken
together, by examining voyeurism and exhibitionism as drivers of SNS use, the present study advances
our understanding of the socially adverse motives behind SNS use (Antheunis et al. 2010; Panek et al.
2013; Ross et al. 2009; Smock et al. 2011; Xu et al. 2012).
Fourth, our study advances the conceptual understanding and contextualized empirical measurement of
IT use (Benbasat and Barki 2007; Burton-Jones and Straub 2006) in the SNS context. We have
conceptualized SNS use, unboxed it and identified its tangible behavioral components (Smock et al.
2011), and developed measurement items to empirically examine these components. As a result, our
study contributes to building a foundation to empirically examine SNS use. Since SNSs are perhaps the
most widely used category of IT globally, this is a significant contribution to IS research and practice.
5.3 Implications to practice
The increasing awareness of the dualities of IT use (see Soror et al. 2015; Turel and Serenko 2012) calls
for the ethical considerations of the positive and negative impacts and side effects for different
stakeholders. For example, maximizing the exhibitionistic value of its platform may benefit the SNS
operator, at least in the short or medium term. However, from the users' and societal perspective this
may promote narcissistic conduct and encourage users to jeopardize their privacy through excessive
sharing of personal information. Thus, when introducing new features for self-promotion, SNS operators
should consider what an acceptable level of exhibitionism is in order to sustain active content
production. Similarly, we encourage SNS operators to consider to what extent fulfilling users'
voyeuristic desires is socially desirable.
Second, our results suggest exhibitionistic self-promotion is the main driver of SNS use while social
enhancement has no effect. This exhibitionistic value seems to be important in promoting users'
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
22
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
sustained engagement in an SNS. At the same time, however, we found that having more friends in the
SNS is a way to mitigate the risk of SNS use for exhibitionistic purposes and induce SNS use for social
enhancement purposes. Thus, from the perspective of SNS operators, putting an emphasis on
exhibitionistic value as well as helping users to increase the size of their networks seems an advisable
course of action.
Finally, we found both interpersonal connectivity and voyeurism drive SNS use. This indicates that SNS
use is also about staying in touch with other people and being informed about people. In developing
their services, SNS operators such as Facebook have emphasized features for self-presentation while
perhaps not devoting a similar level of attention to features that may satisfy users' curiosity and
information needs. To address this issue, Facebook has been putting increasing effort into its search
functionalities by introducing the Graph Search that allows people to search for users with specific
interests or places that one's friends have visited. These improved search features are likely to make
obtaining information about other users easier, while also potentially increasing the voyeuristic appeal
of the platform.
5.4 Limitations and future research
Like any other, the present study is subject to a number of limitations. At the same time, the limitations
may serve as an avenue for future research. First, the study has been conducted using a single SNS
(Facebook) and mostly Finnish users. This evidently limits the generalization of the findings to other
user groups or other SNSs. We therefore suggest a replication study in other populations and in other
SNSs.
Second, we relied on self-reported constructs in measuring SNS use. Since self-reported usage data can
suffer from a number of biases (Straub and Limayen 1995), we suggest further research that employs
objective measures of usage such as log data.
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
23
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
Third, we investigated exhibitionism and voyeurism strictly at the individual level. However, a person’s
behavior in a social network is likely to affect others as well (cf. Kramer et al. 2014). Hence, future
research could scrutinize how SNS users perceive the exhibitionism of others and how that affects their
user experience.
We believe that our research opens up a number of directions for further research. First, we hold that
the relationship between the antecedents and SNS use may not necessarily be linear. In other words,
there might be a threshold level of usage after which both positive and negative outcomes start to accrue.
Thus, we suggest future research that would examine the actual nature of this relationship in greater
detail.
Second, since SNSs afford a wide range of different uses such as socializing, entertainment, revealing
status, and information searches (Huang et al. 2014; Ku et al. 2013; Park et al. 2009), they offer diverse
gratifications to their users (Huang et al. 2014; Ku et al. 2013; Mäntymäki and Islam 2014).
Consequently, there are likely to be a number of other dualities than the ones examined in this study. As
a result, future research could examine the dualities of other gratifications and the extent to which they
affect SNS use.
Third and finally, future research could identify innovative SNS design features that make the negative
aspects of SNS use, such as voyeurism and exhibitionism, more transparent and hence mitigate their
possible negative consequences.
6 Conclusion
The aim of the study was to examine the Janus face of SNS use, in particular the socially positive and
socially dysfunctional gratifications stemming from fulfilling the need for self-presentation and the need
to belong, as the predictors of SNS use. By examining both the positive and negative sides of these key
predictors of SNS use in parallel, the present study offers a more fine-grained understanding of the key
predictors of SNS use.
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
24
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
References
Aladwani, A. M. 2014, "Gravitating Towards Facebook (GoToFB): What it is? and how can it be
Measured?" Computers in Human Behavior (33:4), pp. 270-278.
Albrechtslund, A. 2008, "Online Social Networking as Participatory Surveillance," First Monday
(13:3).
Ames, D. R., P. Rose, and C. P. Anderson. 2006, "The NPI-16 as a Short Measure of Narcissism,"
Journal of Research in Personality (40:4), 8, pp. 440-450.
Antheunis, M. L., P. M. Valkenburg, and J. Peter. 2010, "Getting Acquainted through Social Network
Sites: Testing a Model of Online Uncertainty Reduction and Social Attraction," Computers in
Human Behavior (26:1), 1, pp. 100-109.
Armstrong, J. S., and T. Overton. 1977, "Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys," Journal of
Marketing Research (14), pp. 396-402.
Bagdasarov, Z., K. Greene, S. C. Banerjee, M. Krcmar, I. Yanovitzky, and D. Ruginyte. 2010, "I Am
what I Watch: Voyeurism, Sensation Seeking, and Television Viewing Patterns," Journal of
Broadcasting & Electronic Media (54:2), pp. 299-315.
Bagozzi, R. P., and U. M. Dholakia. 2002, "Intentional Social Action in Virtual Communities,"
Journal of Interactive Marketing (16:2), Spring, pp. 2-21.
Barclay, D., C. Higgins, and R. Thompson. 1995, "The Partial Least Squares (PLS) Approach to
Causal Modeling: Personal Computer Adoption and use as an Illustration," Technology Studies
(2:2), pp. 285-324.
Baruh, L. 2010, "Mediated Voyeurism and the Guilty Pleasure of Consuming Reality Television,"
Media Psychology (13:3), Jul, pp. 201-221.
———. 2009, "Publicized Intimacies on Reality Television: An Analysis of Voyeuristic Content and
its Contribution to the Appeal of Reality Programming," Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic
Media (53:2), 04, pp. 190-210.
Baumeister, R. F., and M. R. Leary. 1995, "The Need to Belong: Desire for Interpersonal Attachments
as a Fundamental Human Motivation," Psychological Bulletin (117:3), May, pp. 497-529.
Beaudry, A., and A. Pinsonneault. 2010, "The Other Side of Acceptance: Studying the Direct and
Indirect Effects of Emotions on Information Technology use." MIS Quarterly (34:4), pp. 689-
710.
Belk, R. W. 2013, "Extended Self in a Digital World," Journal of Consumer Research (40:3), October,
pp. 477-500.
Benbasat, I., and H. Barki. 2007, "Quo Vadis, TAM?" Journal of the Association for Information
Systems (8:4), Apr, pp. 211.
Blumler, J. G. 1979, "The Role of Theory in Uses and Gratifications Studies," Communication
Research (6:1), January 01, pp. 9-36.
Brunell, A. B., S. Staats, J. Barden, and J. M. Hupp. 2011, "Narcissism and Academic Dishonesty:
The Exhibitionism Dimension and the Lack of Guilt," Personality and Individual Differences
(50:3), 2, pp. 323-328.
Burton-Jones, A., and D. W. Straub. 2006, "Reconceptualizing System Usage: An Approach and
Empirical Test," Information Systems Research (17:3), September 01, pp. 228-246.
Calvert, C. 2009. Voyeur Nation: Media, Privacy, and Peering in Modern Culture, Basic Books.
Carpenter, C. J. 2012, "Narcissism on Facebook: Self-Promotional and Anti-Social Behavior,"
Personality and Individual Differences (52:4), 3, pp. 482-486.
Chen, A., Y. Lu, B. Wang, L. Zhao, and M. Li. 2013, "What Drives Content Creation Behavior on
SNSs? A Commitment Perspective," Journal of Business Research (66:12), 12, pp. 2529-2535.
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
25
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
Cheung, C. M. K., P. Chiu, and M. K. O. Lee. 2011, "Online Social Networks: Why do Students use
Facebook?" Computers in Human Behavior (27:6), pp. 2322-2339.
Choi, Y. H., and N. N. Bazarova. 2015, "Self-Disclosure Characteristics and Motivations in Social
Media: Extending the Functional Model to Multiple Social Network Sites," Human
Communication Research (41:4), pp. 480-500.
Clark, L. A., and D. Watson. 1995, "Constructing Validity: Basic Issues in Objective Scale
Development." Psychological Assessment (7:3), pp. 309-319.
De Charms, R. 1968. Personal Causation: The Internal Affective Determinants of Behavior, Academic
Press, New York.
Deci, E. L., and R. M. Ryan. 2000, "The 'what' and 'Why' of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the
Self-Determination of Behavior," Psychological Inquiry (11:4), 10, pp. 227-268.
Dholakia, U. M., R. P. Bagozzi, and L. K. Pearo. 2004, "A Social Influence Model of Consumer
Participation in Network- and Small-Group-Based Virtual Communities," International Journal
of Research in Marketing (21:3), 9, pp. 241-263.
DSM-IV. 1994. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4, American Psychiatric
Association, Arlington, VA.
Ellison, N. B., C. Steinfield, and C. Lampe. 2007, "The Benefits of Facebook "Friends:" Social Capital
and College Students? use of Online Social Network Sites," Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication (12:4), pp. 1143-1168.
Fornell, C., and D. F. Larcker. 1981, "Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable
Variables and Measurement Error," Journal of Marketing Research (18:1), pp. 39-50.
Fox, J., and J. 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 (45:4), pp. 168-176.
Garcia, D., and S. Sikström. 2014, "The Dark Side of Facebook: Semantic Representations of Status
Updates Predict the Dark Triad of Personality," Personality and Individual Differences (67:9),
pp. 92-96.
Gefen, D., and D. Straub. 2005, "A Practical Guide to Factorial Validity using Pls-Graph: Tutorial and
Annotated Example," Communications of AIS (2005:16), pp. 91-109.
Gonzales, A. L., and J. T. Hancock. 2008, "Identity Shift in Computer-Mediated Environments,"
Media Psychology (11:2), pp. 167-185.
Goodhue, D. L., W. Lewis, and R. Thompson. 2012, "Does Pls have Advantages for Small Sample
Size Or Non-Normal Data?" MIS Quarterly (36:3), pp. 981-A16.
Grieve, R., M. Indian, K. Witteveen, G. Anne Tolan, and J. Marrington. 2013, "Face-to-Face Or
Facebook: Can Social Connectedness be Derived Online?" Computers in Human Behavior
(29:3), pp. 604-609.
Hair, J. F., C. M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2011, "PLS-SEM: Indeed a Silver Bullet," Journal of
Marketing Theory & Practice (19:2), pp. 139-152.
Hall, J. A., N. Pennington, and A. Lueders. 2014, "Impression Management and Formation on
Facebook: A Lens Model Approach," New Media & Society (16:6), pp. 958-982.
Harman, H. H. 1976. Modern Factor Analysis, University of Chicago Press.
Hollenbaugh, E. E., and A. L. Ferris. 2014, "Facebook Self-Disclosure: Examining the Role of Traits,
Social Cohesion, and Motives," Computers in Human Behavior (30:0), , pp. 50-58.
Horvath, S., and C. C. Morf. 2010, "To be Grandiose Or Not to be Worthless: Different Routes to
Self-Enhancement for Narcissism and Self-Esteem," Journal of Research in Personality (44:5),
pp. 585-592.
Huang, L., Y. Hsieh, and Y. J. Wu. 2014, "Gratifications and Social Network Service Usage: The
Mediating Role of Online Experience," Information & Management (51:6), pp. 774-782.
Joinson, A. N. 2008. "Looking at, Looking Up Or Keeping Up with People?: Motives and use of
Facebook," pp. 1027-1036.
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
26
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
Joinson, A. N., C. Paine, T. Buchanan, and U. Reips. 2008, "Measuring Self-Disclosure Online:
Blurring and Non-Response to Sensitive Items in Web-Based Surveys," Computers in Human
Behavior (24:5), pp. 2158-2171.
Jourard, S. M., and P. Lasakow. 1958, "Some Factors in Self-Disclosure," Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology (56:1), pp. 91-98.
Junco, R. 2012, "The Relationship between Frequency of Facebook use, Participation in Facebook
Activities, and Student Engagement," Computers & Education (58:1), pp. 162-171.
Katz, E., J. G. Blumler, and M. Gurevitch. 1974. "Utilization of Mass Communication by the
Individual," The use of Mass Communications: Current Perspectives on Gratifications Research,
J. G. Blumler and E. Katz (eds.), Sage, Berverly Hills, CA.
Katz, E., H. Haas, and M. Gurevitch. 1973, "On the use of the Mass Media for Important Things,"
American Sociological Review (38:2), pp. 164-181.
Koroleva, K., H. Krasnova, N. Veltri, and O. Günther. 2011, "It’s all about Networking! Empirical
Investigation of Social Capital Formation on Social Network Sites," ICIS 2011 Proceedings.
Paper 24.
Kramer, A. D. I., J. E. Guillory, and J. T. Hancock. 2014, "Experimental Evidence of Massive-Scale
Emotional Contagion through Social Networks," Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences (111:24), June 17, pp. 8788-8790.
Krasnova, H., S. Spiekermann, K. Koroleva, and T. Hildebrand. 2010, "Online Social Networks: Why
we Disclose," Journal of Information Technology (25:2), pp. 109-125.
Krasnova, H., H. Wenninger, T. Widjaja, and P. Buxmann. 2013. "Envy on Facebook: A Hidden
Threat to Users’ Life Satisfaction?" In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on
Wirtschaftsinformatik, Leipzig, Germany.
Krasnova, H., T. Widjaja, P. Buxmann, H. Wenninger, and I. Benbasat. 2015, "Why Following
Friends can Hurt You: An Exploratory Investigation of the Effects of Envy on Social Networking
Sites among College-Age Users," Information Systems Research (26:3), pp. 585-605.
Kraut, R., M. Patterson, V. Lundmark, S. Kiesler, T. Mukophadhyay, and W. Scherlis. 1998, "Internet
Paradox: A Social Technology that Reduces Social Involvement and Psychological Well-being?"
American Psychologist (53:9), pp. 1017.
Ku, Y., R. Chen, and H. Zhang. 2013, "Why do Users Continue using Social Networking Sites? an
Exploratory Study of Members in the United States and Taiwan," Information & Management
(50:7) pp. 571-581.
Kwon, O., and Y. Wen. 2010, "An Empirical Study of the Factors Affecting Social Network Service
Use," Computers in Human Behavior (26:2), pp. 254-263.
Lacan, J. 1998. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis, WW Norton & Company.
Lampe, C., N. B. Ellison, and C. Steinfield. 2006. "A Face (Book) in the Crowd: Social Searching Vs.
Social Browsing," Proceedings of the 2006 20th Anniversary Conference on Computer Supported
Cooperative Work.pp. 167-170.
Lawler, E. E., and L. W. Porter. 1967, "Antecedent Attitudes of Effective Managerial Performance,"
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance (2:2), pp. 122-142.
Limayem, M., S. G. Hirt, and C. M. K. Cheung. 2007, "How Habit Limits the Predictive Power of
Intention: The Case of Information Systems Continuance," MIS Quarterly (31:4), pp. 705-738.
Lindell, M. K., and D. J. Whitney. 2001, "Accounting for Common Method Variance in Cross-
Sectional Research Designs." Journal of Applied Psychology (86:1), pp. 114-121.
Lyndon, A., J. Bonds-Raacke, and A. D. Cratty. 2011, "College Students' Facebook Stalking of Ex-
Partners," Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking (14:12), pp. 711-716.
Mäntymäki, M., and A. K. M. N. Islam. 2014. "Voyeurism and Exhibitionism as Gratifications from
Prosuming Social Networking Sites," In Proceedings of the 22nd European Conference on
Information Systems (ECIS2014).
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
27
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
Marwick, A. E. 2012, "The Public Domain: Social Surveillance in Everyday Life," Surveillance &
Society (9:4), 04, pp. 378-393.
Maslow, A. H. 1954. Motivation and Personality, Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc., New York, NY.
McAndrew, F. T., and H. S. Jeong. 2012, "Who does what on Facebook? Age, Sex, and Relationship
Status as Predictors of Facebook Use," Computers in Human Behavior (28:6), pp. 2359-2365.
McKenna, K. Y. A., and J. A. Bargh. 1999, "Causes and Consequences of Social Interaction on the
Internet: A Conceptual Framework," Media Psychology (1:3), pp. 249-269.
Mehdizadeh, S. 2010, "Self-Presentation 2.0: Narcissism and Self-Esteem on Facebook,"
Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking (13:4), pp. 357-364.
Metzl, J. M. 2004, "Voyeur Nation? Changing Definitions of Voyeurism, 1950-2004," Harvard
Review of Psychiatry (12:2), pp. 127-131.
Morf, C. C., and F. Rhodewalt. 2001, "Unraveling the Paradoxes of Narcissism: A Dynamic Self-
Regulatory Processing Model," Psychological Inquiry (12:4), pp. 177-196.
Nabi, R. L., E. N. Biely, S. J. Morgan, and C. R. Stitt. 2003, "Reality-Based Television Programming
and the Psychology of its Appeal," Media Psychology (5:4), pp. 303-330.
Nabi, R. L., C. R. Stitt, J. Halford, and K. L. Finnerty. 2006, "Emotional and Cognitive Predictors of
the Enjoyment of Reality-Based and Fictional Television Programming: An Elaboration of the
Uses and Gratifications Perspective," Media Psychology (8:4), pp. 421-447.
Nadkarni, A., and S. G. Hofmann. 2012, "Why do People use Facebook?" Personality and Individual
Differences (52:3), pp. 243-249.
Nicholls, J. G. 1984, "Achievement Motivation: Conceptions of Ability, Subjective Experience, Task
Choice, and Performance." Psychological Review (91:3), pp. 328.
Oh, H. J., E. Ozkaya, and R. LaRose. 2014, "How does Online Social Networking Enhance Life
Satisfaction? the Relationships among Online Supportive Interaction, Affect, Perceived Social
Support, Sense of Community, and Life Satisfaction," Computers in Human Behavior (30:1), pp.
69-78.
Panek, E. T., Y. Nardis, and S. Konrath. 2013, "Mirror Or Megaphone?: How Relationships between
Narcissism and Social Networking Site use Differ on Facebook and Twitter," Computers in
Human Behavior (29:5), pp. 2004-2012.
Park, N., K. F. Kee, and S. Valenzuela. 2009, "Being Immersed in Social Networking Environment:
Facebook Groups, Uses and Gratifications, and Social Outcomes," CyberPsychology & Behavior
(12:6), pp. 729-733.
Pempek, T. A., Y. A. Yermolayeva, and S. L. Calvert. 2009, "College Students' Social Networking
Experiences on Facebook," Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology (30:3), 0, pp. 227-238.
Podsakoff, P. M., S. B. MacKenzie, J. Lee, and N. P. Podsakoff. 2003, "Common Method Biases in
Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies," Journal
of Applied Psychology (88:5), pp. 879-903.
Przybylski, A. K., K. Murayama, C. R. DeHaan, and V. Gladwell. 2013, "Motivational, Emotional,
and Behavioral Correlates of Fear of Missing Out," Computers in Human Behavior (29:4), pp.
1841-1848.
Raacke, J., and J. Bonds-Raacke. 2008, "MySpace and Facebook: Applying the Uses and
Gratifications Theory to Exploring Friend-Networking Sites," Cyberpsychology & Behavior
(11:2), pp. 169-174.
Raskin, R., and H. Terry. 1988, "A Principal-Components Analysis of the Narcissistic Personality
Inventory and further Evidence of its Construct Validity." Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology (54:5), pp. 890.
Reynolds, W. M. 1982, "Development of Reliable and Valid Short Forms of the Marlowe‐Crowne
Social Desirability Scale," Journal of Clinical Psychology (38:1), pp. 119-125.
Ringle, C. M., S. Wende, and A. Will. 2005, "Smart PLS 2.0 M3," University of Hamburg,
www.smartpls.de.
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
28
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
Ross, C., E. S. Orr, M. Sisic, J. M. Arseneault, M. G. Simmering, and R. R. Orr. 2009, "Personality
and Motivations Associated with Facebook Use," Computers in Human Behavior (25:2), 3, pp.
578-586.
Ruggiero, T. E. 2000, "Uses and Gratifications Theory in the 21st Century," Mass Communication &
Society (3:1), pp. 3-37.
Ryan, T., and S. Xenos. 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), pp. 1658-1664.
Schriesheim, C. A., and J. F. Schriesheim. 1978, "The Invariance of Anchor Points obtained by
Magnitude Estimation and Pair-Comparison Treatment of Complete Ranks Scaling Procedures:
An Empirical Comparison and Implications for Validity of Measurement," Educational and
Psychological Measurement (38:4), pp. 977-983.
Seidman, G. 2013, "Self-Presentation and Belonging on Facebook: How Personality Influences Social
Media use and Motivations," Personality and Individual Differences (54:3), pp. 402-407.
Sheldon, K. M., N. Abad, and C. Hinsch. 2011, "A Two-Process View of Facebook use and
Relatedness Need-Satisfaction: Disconnection Drives use, and Connection Rewards It," Journal
of Personality & Social Psychology (100:4), pp. 766-775.
Smock, A. D., N. B. Ellison, C. Lampe, and D. Y. Wohn. 2011, "Facebook as a Toolkit: A Uses and
Gratification Approach to Unbundling Feature Use," Computers in Human Behavior (27:6), pp.
2322-2329.
Soror, A. A., B. I. Hammer, Z. R. Steelman, F. D. Davis, and M. M. Limayem. 2015, "Good Habits
Gone Bad: Explaining Negative Consequences Associated with the use of Mobile Phones from a
Dual-Systems Perspective," Information Systems Journal (25:45), pp. 403-427.
Stafford, T. F., M. R. Stafford, and L. L. Schkade. 2004, "Determining Uses and Gratifications for the
Internet," Decision Sciences (35:2), pp. 259-288.
Steinfield, C., N. B. Ellison, and C. Lampe. 2008, "Social Capital, Self-Esteem, and use of Online
Social Network Sites: A Longitudinal Analysis," Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology
(29:6), pp. 434-445.
Straub, D., and M. Limayen. 1995, "Measuring System Usage: Implications for IS Theory Testing,"
Management Science (41:8), pp. 1328-1343.
Sun, J., and J. T. C. Teng. 2012, "Information Systems use: Construct Conceptualization and Scale
Development," Computers in Human Behavior (28:5), pp. 1564-1574.
Tice, D. M., and J. Faber. 2001. "Cognitive and Motivational Processes in Self-Presentation," The
Social Mind: Cognitive and Motivational Aspects of Interpersonal Behavior, Joseph P. Forgas,
Kipling D. Williams and Ladd Wheeler (eds.), University of Cambridge Press, Cambridge, UK,
pp. 139-156.
Tokunaga, R. S. 2011a, "Social Networking Site Or Social Surveillance Site? Understanding the use
of Interpersonal Electronic Surveillance in Romantic Relationships," Computers in Human
Behavior (27:2), pp. 705-713.
Tokunaga, R. S. 2011b, "Social Networking Site Or Social Surveillance Site? Understanding the use
of Interpersonal Electronic Surveillance in Romantic Relationships," Computers in Human
Behavior (27:2), pp. 705-713.
Turel, O., and A. Serenko. 2012, "The Benefits and Dangers of Enjoyment with Social Networking
Websites," European Journal of Information Systems (21:5) pp. 512-528.
Turkle, S. 2012. Alone Together: Why we Expect More from Technology and Less from each Other,
Basic books.
Utz, S. 2010, "Show Me Your Friends and I Will Tell You what Type of Person You are: How One's
Profile, Number of Friends, and Type of Friends Influence Impression Formation on Social
Network Sites," Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (15:2), pp. 314-335.
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
29
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
Utz, S., and C. J. Beukeboom. 2011, "The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships:
Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness," Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication (16:4), pp. 511-527.
Valenzuela, S., N. Park, and K. F. Kee. 2009, "Is there Social Capital in a Social Network Site?
Facebook use and College Students' Life Satisfaction, Trust, and Participation," Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication (14:4), pp. 875-901.
Venkatesh, V., and F. D. Davis. 2000, "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance
Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science (46:2), pp. 186-204.
Wang, S. S., and M. A. Stefanone. 2013, "Showing Off? Human Mobility and the Interplay of Traits,
Self-Disclosure, and Facebook Check-Ins," Social Science Computer Review (31:4), pp. 437-457.
Wellman, B., and M. Gulia. 1999. "Net-Surfers Don'T Ride Alone: Virtual Commmunities as
Communities." Communities and Cyberspace, Kollock P. and Marc A. Smith (eds.)
Wise, K., S. Alhabash, and H. Park. 2010, "Emotional Responses during Social Information Seeking
on Facebook," Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking (13:5), pp. 555-562.
Xu, C., S. Ryan, V. Prybutok, and C. Wen. 2012, "It is Not for Fun: An Examination of Social
Network Site Usage," Information & Management (49:5), 7, pp. 210-217.
Zhang, P. 2013, "The Affective Response Model: A Theoretical Framework of Affective Concepts and
their Relationships in the ICT Context," MIS Quarterly (37:1), pp. 247-274.
Zhang, Y., L. S. Tang, and L. Leung. 2011, "Gratifications, Collective Self-Esteem, Online Emotional
Openness, and Traitlike Communication Apprehension as Predictors of Facebook Uses,"
Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking (14:12), pp. 733-739.
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
30
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
Appendix A: The Survey instrument
Construct
Item
Social
enhancement
(Dholakia et al.
2004)
Please evaluate your use of Facebook and respond to the following statements
SOC1: Using Facebook helps me impress other people.
SOC2: Using Facebook helps me express myself.
SOC3: Using Facebook helps me feel important.
SOC4: Using Facebook helps me project a desired image of myself.
Interpersonal
connectivity
(Dholakia et al.
2004)
INT. PERS.1: Using Facebook makes it easier to stay in touch with my friends.
INT. PERS.2: Using Facebook helps me stay updated on how my friends are doing.
INT. PERS.3: Using Facebook helps me stay in touch with the people I know.
INT. PERS.4: Using Facebook helps me get information about how the people I know are
doing.
Content
Consumption
(New scale)
Please evaluate how often do you engage in the following activities on Facebook:
CC1: Watch my friends’ profiles.
CC2: Watch other users’ photos (others than my friends).
CC3: Watch other users’ profiles (others than my friends).
CC4: Watch my friends’ photos.
CC5: Follow my friends’ updates.*
CC6: Receive likes/comments to my postings.*
Content
Production
(New scale)
Please evaluate how often do you engage in the following activities on Facebook:
CP1: Update my status
CP2: Add photos to my galleries.
CP3: Comment other users’ postings.
CP4: Like other users' postings.
CP5: Tag my friends to the photos I have added to my galleries.
CP6: Wish my friends happy birthday.*
CP7: Use the check-in feature to indicate where I am.*
Exhibitionism
(Ames et al.
2006)
EXHIBIT1: I really like to be the center of attention on Facebook.
EXHIBIT2: I am apt to show off on Facebook if I get the chance.
EXHIBIT3: I get upset when people don’t comment/put a like on my posts in Facebook.
Voyeurism
(Bagdasarov et
al. 2010; Nabi
et al. 2006)
Please evaluate your use of Facebook and respond to the following statements:
VOYEUR1: I enjoy viewing others’ photos no matter if I know them or not.
VOYEUR2: I like watching people when they don’t know that they are being watched.
VOYEUR3: I get satisfaction out of watching others when they are unaware.
Comprehensive
ness of profile
information
(Limayem et al.
2007)
Please select the ones that you have included in your Facebook profile from the list
below:
work history, languages, networks, political views, relationship status, family (parents,
children, siblings), movies I like, books I like, groups I belong to, celebrities I like, brands
I like
Amount of Use
(Venkatesh and
Davis 2000)
How many times per day you typically visit Facebook per day?
with computer
with phone
with tablet
The duration of your typical Facebook visit with different devices (enter in minutes)
with computer
with phone
with tablet
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
31
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
Social
desirability
bias
(Reynolds
1982)
SDB1: It is sometimes hard for me to go on with my work if I am not encouraged. (F)
SDB2: I sometimes feel resentful when I don’t get my way. (F)
SDB3: On a few occasions, I have given up doing something because I thought too little of
my ability.(F)
SDB4: There have been times when I felt like rebelling against people in authority even
though I knew they were right. (F)
SDB5: No matter who I’m talking to, I’m always a good listener. (T)
SDB6: There have been occasions when I took advantage of someone. (F)
SDB7: I’m always willing to admit it when I make a mistake. (T)
SDB8: I sometimes try to get even, rather than forgive and forget. (F)
SDB9: I am always courteous, even to people who are disagreeable. (T)
SDB10: I have never been irked when people expressed ideas very different from my own.
(T)
SDB11: There have been times when I was quite jealous of the good fortune of others. (F)
SDB12: I am sometimes irritated by people who ask favors of me. (F)
Appendix B: Item means, standard deviations (S.D.), and loadings.
Construct
Alpha
CR
AVE
Item
Mean
S.D.
Loading
Social
enhancement
0.87
0.91
0.73
SE1
2.44
1.05
0.83
SE2
2.72
1.13
0.87
SE3
2.37
1.14
0.89
SE4
2.35
1.23
0.82
Interpersonal
connectivity
0.85
0.90
0.69
INT. PERS1
4.41
0.89
0.82
INT. PERS2
4.14
0.97
0.83
INT. PERS3
4.17
0.96
0.86
INT. PERS4
4.12
0.94
0.82
Exhibitionism
0.71
0.84
0.63
EXHIBIT1
2.28
1.14
0.82
EXHIBIT2
2.08
1.06
0.77
EXHIBIT3
2.76
1.34
0.79
Voyeurism
0.74
0.85
0.65
VOYEUR1
2.27
1.22
0.78
VOYEUR2
2.14
1.22
0.80
VOYEUR3
1.64
.97
0.82
Content
consumption
0.87
0.91
0.73
CC1
3.18
0.99
0.88
CC2
3.00
1.10
0.88
CC3
2.37
1.05
0.82
CC4
3.34
0.91
0.89
CC5*
3.83
0.97
-
CC6*
3.24
1.00
-
Content
production
0.82
0.87
0.58
CP1
2.21
0.75
0.75
CP2
2.24
0.72
0.76
CP3
2.87
0.81
0.81
CP4
3.64
0.99
0.81
CP5
2.03
0.95
0.70
CP6*
3.34
1.17
-
CP7*
1.33
0.67
-
Note: * item removed due to loading below 0.7
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
32
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
Appendix C: Correlations between latent variables (square root of AVEs in the main diagonal)
AGE
CC
CP
EXHIBIT
COM.
PROF.
GENDER
NF
INT.
PERS.
SE
VOYEUR
AUSE
AGE
1.00
CC
-0.14
1.00
CP
-0.03
0.38
1.00
EXHIBIT
-0.09
0.27
0.60
1.00
SELFDIS
-0.04
0.31
0.44
0.35
1.00
GENDER
-0.00
-0.05
-0.26
-0.20
0.03
1.00
NF
-0.18
0.32
0.43
0.26
0.20
0.13
1.00
INT. PERS.
-0.18
0.39
0.44
0.35
0.27
-0.16
0.31
1.00
SE
-0.11
0.22
0.39
0.62
0.35
-0.01
0.30
0.43
1.00
VOYEUR
-0.13
0.49
0.10
0.23
0.11
0.04
0.18
0.20
0.23
1.00
AUSE
0.02
0.21
0.18
0.12
0.22
0.13
0.32
0.11
0.21
0.11
1.00
Note: Content Production (CP), Content Consumption (CC), Amount of Use (AUSE), Comprehensiveness of Profile
Information (COM. PROF.), Social enhancement (SE), Exhibitionism (EXHIBIT), Voyeurism (VOYEUR), Interpersonal
Connectivity (INT. PERS.), Number of Friends (NF)
Bibliographic information:
Mäntymäki, Matti & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative
Sides of Social Networking Site Use. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, August 2016, pp. 14-26.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.078
33
Mäntymäki & Islam (2016) The Janus Face of Facebook: Positive and Negative Sides Social Networking Site use
Appendix D: Item loadings and cross-loadings
CC
CP
EXHIBIT
INT.
PERS.
SE
VOYEU
R
AUSE
AGE
COM.
PROF.
GEN
DER
NF
CC1
0.87
0.32
0.19
0.35
0.19
0.49
0.18
-0.07
0.23
-0.03
0.24
CC2
0.88
0.33
0.21
0.31
0.16
0.38
0.20
-0.19
0.31
-0.00
0.33
CC3
0.82
0.22
0.25
0.32
0.23
0.54
0.19
-0.15
0.25
-0.05
0.26
CC4
0.84
0.41
0.26
0.37
0.17
0.27
0.16
-0.06
0.28
-0.10
0.26
CP1
0.16
0.75
0.46
0.27
0.29
-0.03
0.06
0.06
0.35
-0.18
0.21
CP2
0.27
0.76
0.47
0.24
0.28
0.05
0.14
-0.00
0.35
-0.18
0.31
CP3
0.29
0.81
0.41
0.39
0.26
0.02
0.15
0.09
0.30
-0.20
0.36
CP4
0.38
0.81
0.45
0.43
0.24
0.14
0.12
-0.07
0.33
-0.27
0.35
CP5
0.32
0.70
0.47
0.30
0.42
0.19
0.22
-0.20
0.35
-0.16
0.39
EXHIBIT1
0.18
0.49
0.82
0.18
0.50
0.17
0.14
-0.05
0.35
-0.05
0.29
EXHIBIT2
0.12
0.46
0.77
0.28
0.48
0.07
0.05
-0.05
0.24
-0.13
0.15
EXHIBIT3
0.32
0.46
0.79
0.36
0.50
0.28
0.07
-0.11
0.24
-0.28
0.17
INT. PERS.1
0.30
0.34
0.27
0.82
0.32
0.10
0.09
-0.22
0.16
-0.12
0.31
INT. PERS.2
0.31
0.35
0.31
0.83
0.38
0.19
0.05
-0.07
0.22
-0.17
0.22
INT. PERS.3
0.40
0.38
0.28
0.87
0.33
0.15
0.10
-0.24
0.26
-0.12
0.30
INT. PERS.4
0.29
0.37
0.30
0.82
0.41
0.22
0.11
-0.06
0.24
-0.11
0.20
SE1
0.17
0.30
0.51
0.30
0.83
0.18
0.21
-0.00
0.27
0.00
0.21
SE2
0.20
0.39
0.56
0.43
0.87
0.16
0.20
-0.14
0.37
-0.01
0.31
SE3
0.19
0.36
0.54
0.40
0.89
0.15
0.15
-0.16
0.30
-0.03
0.26
SE4
0.19
0.26
0.51
0.34
0.82
0.30
0.14
-0.04
0.23
-0.01
0.23
VOYEUR1
0.26
0.02
0.27
0.11
0.28
0.78
0.09
-0.12
0.12
0.02
0.05
VOYEUR2
0.48
0.12
0.11
0.17
0.13
0.80
0.10
-0.09
0.11
0.07
0.26
VOYEUR3
0.36
0.07
0.22
0.19
0.19
0.82
0.07
-0.12
0.03
-0.00
0.05
AUSE
0.21
0.18
0.12
0.11
0.21
0.11
1.00
0.02
0.22
0.13
0.32
AGE
-0.14
-0.03
-0.09
-0.18
-0.11
-0.13
0.02
1.00
-0.04
-0.00
-0.18
COM. PROF.
0.31
0.49
0.35
0.27
0.35
0.11
0.22
-0.04
1.00
0.03
0.20
GENDER
-0.05
-0.26
-0.20
-0.16
-0.01
0.04
0.13
-0.00
0.03
1.00
0.13
NF
0.32
0.43
0.26
0.31
0.30
0.18
0.32
-0.18
0.20
0.13
1.00
Note: Content Production (CP), Content Consumption (CC), Amount of Use (AUSE), Comprehensiveness of Profile
Information (COM. PROF.), Social enhancement (SE), Exhibitionism (EXHIBIT), Voyeurism (VOYEUR), Interpersonal
Connectivity (INT. PERS.), Number of Friends (NF)
