Content uploaded by M. Murat Yesil
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by M. Murat Yesil on Dec 10, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Baku, Azerbaijan | 75
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
of
ACADEMIC RESEARCH
Vol.
6
. No.
2
.
March
, 201
4
M. Murat Yesil. The relationship between facebook use and personality traits of university students. International Journal of
Academic Research Part B; 2014; 6(2), 75-80. DO I: 10.7813/2075-4124.2014/6-2/B.12
Library of Congress Class ification: HQ767.8-792.2
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FACEBOOK USE AND
PERSONALITY TRAITS OF UNIVERSITY STUDENTS
M. Murat Yesil
Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya (TURKEY)
myesil@konya.edu.tr
DOI: 10.7813/2075-4124.2014/6-2/B.12
Received: 21 Oct, 2013
Accepted: 18 Feb, 2014
ABSTRACT
Social media have changed our lives in many ways. The traditional media are no longer the only avenue
we have to follow to get or share information. Facebook which is the most famous one of the social media
networks has 1.06 billion monthly active users as of 2013, January 01. Since its establishment in 2004, a number
of studies were conducted on Facebook. Some of them searched for the reasons that motivate university students
to use Facebook. Several studies discussed how the gender differences affect university students in using
Facebook. And some other works tried to analyze how Facebook use affects the behaviours of university
students. Facebook, as the super highway of social media avenues, affects its users one way or another.
Especially the youth who see Facebook as a natural part of their daily lives feel this effect much stronger than
comparing with the old generation who are not frequent Facebook users. Some studies argue that Facebook use
has positive effects on individuals, on the contrary, according to some other studies Facebook use has negative
effects. The aim of this study is to find out the relationship between the Facebook use and the personality traits of
university students.
Key words: Facebook Use, Personality Traits, University Students
1. INTRODUCTION
Social media, which ended the hegemony of the traditional mass media, has made history as a noticeable
development. Today, mass media outlets owned by certain media groups, who used to play important roles in
determining the world's agenda, are not as powerful as they were in the past. The number of social m edia
networks, which began to spread all over the world rapidly after the incredible developments in the fields of
communication, transportation and web technology, is on the increase. The social media networks, that are
estimated to be more than 500, are being used by a significant portion of the world's population.
Facebook, Twitter and Myspace are the most famous ones of the social networking sites. Facebook is the
top player among them. Facebook has 1.06 billion monthly active users as of 2013, January 01. Since its
establishment in 2004, a number of studies were conducted on Facebook (Sheldon, 2008; Lampe, Ellison, &
Steinfield, 2008; Thompson, & Lougheed, 2012). Some of them searched for the reasons that motivate university
students to use Facebook. Several studies discussed how do the gender differences effect university students’
Facebook use (Sheldon, 2009; Gadekar, Krishnatray, & Gaur, 2012; Thompson & Lougheed, 2012). And some
other works tried to analyze how does Facebook use effect the behaviors of university students (Muise,
Christofides, & Desmarais, 2009; Elphinston & Noller, 2011; Kalpidou, Dan Costin, & Morris, 2011; Gonzales, &
Hancock, 2011; Laudone, 2012).
Facebook which is planned to serve to university students in the formative years and after that was
opened to everybody above 13 years of age, now has become a giant network, spread all over the world.
Facebook, which offers free services to its users from communication to information, photos and videos sharing,
has become a closely observed network by the scientific community. Scholars from different parts of the world are
studying this social media network extensively. The main purpose of this study was to find out the relationship
between Facebook use and personality traits of university students.
The study proceeds as follow: The first section provides an overview of social media networks and
Facebook. Then, detailed literature review comes under the headings: Why do we use Facebook? How does
Facebook use affect the behaviors of university students? Gender effects in Facebook use, Personal traits effect
in Facebook use. Next, the research methodology is presented. After that, findings are discussed and
summarized.
76 | PART B. SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES www.ijar.eu
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
o
f
ACADEMIC RESEARCH
Vol.
6
. No.
2
.
March
, 201
4
1.1 Why do we use Facebook?
As a unique example of social networking sites, Facebook has long been a field of study for many scholars
all over the world. Not only the scholars but ordinary people also trying to find out the answer to this question:
“Why do so many people use Facebook?” Although it may take years for social scientists to reach concrete
results which will help us to understand the reasons why do people prefer Facebook while there are 500 or more
choices, several attempts have been made to explain the main reasons behind the use of Facebook.
Toma & Hancock (2013) said that their study “revealed one reason may be its self-affirming qualities (p.
326)”. Some other scholars suggest that the young use Facebook to maintain relationships and pass time
(Sheldon, 2008, p.73; Elphinston & Noller, 2011, p.634; Laudone, 2012, pp.176-78). In 2012, Thompson &
Lougheed published a paper in which they stated: “Facebook provides a venue for young adults to express
themselves and interact with each other” (p.97). In another major study, Sponcil & Gitimu (2012) come up with a
different assertion: “Many individuals use social network sites to feel popular, trying to add as many friends as
possible so they appear to be more admired” (p. 6). Agreeing with Sponcil & Gitimu, in general, Kalpidou, Dan
Costin, & Morris (2011) add an extra reason for Facebook use: “On average, college students had between 150
and 200 Facebook friends and generally used the Web site to communicate with others with whom they shared
an offline connection” (p.183).
According to Jang Hyun, Min-Sun, Yoonjae (2010, p.1081) there is the desire of self-identity promotion
behind the Facebook use. Ryan & Xenos (2011) add that Facebook provides the ego-centric persons self –
propagation opportunity (pp. 1261-1262). A previous study conducted by Pempek, Yermolayeva, & Calvert (2009)
found evidence that instinct of self-presentation plays a significant role in the use of Facebook (pp.234-36).
Data from several sources have also identified that Facebook use is related with the self-exposure of
young adults (Pempek & Calvert, 2009, p.237; Wilson, Fornasier, & White, 2010, p. 12-13; Gonzales & Hancock,
2011, p. 81). However, Hunt, Atkin, & Krishnan, (2012) differ from the findings of above mentioned studies.
Saying that “entertainment is a significant predictor of interpersonal communication, passing time, and self-
expression”, they assert that the main reason behind the Facebook use is “entertainment” and the other reasons
may be classified as subsidiary ones.
Finally, Junghyun & Jong-Eun Roselyn (2011) indicate: “Although motivations behind Facebook use may
vary, Facebook could not have achieved the popularity it currently enjoys had it not been able to provide users
with some pleasure or psychological benefits” (p. 361).
1.2. How does the Facebook use affect the behaviors of university students?
Facebook, as the super highway of social media avenues, affects its users one way or another. Especially
the youth who see Facebook as a natural part of their daily lives feel this effect much stronger than comparing
with the old generation who are not frequent Facebook users. Scholars from all over the world have been
studying this unique social media and its effects on the individual users for years. As a result of this, a
considerable amount of literature has been published on the effects of Facebook use (Pempek, Yermolayeva, &
Calvert, 2009; Kalpidou, Dan Costin, & Morris, 2011; Gonzales & Hancock, 2011; Thompson, & Lougheed, 2012;
Eugenia & Hugo, 2013). Scholars, who are trying to find out a full answer to the question: “Why do we use
Facebook?” are examining all aspects of Facebook use. The most extensive discussion is about the effects of
Facebook use on the individuals. This discussion may be studied in two different groups: Positive effects of
Facebook use and the negative ones.
Some studies assert that Facebook use of the youth may affect their behaviors positively. According to a
study findings majority of the students who participated in a survey say Facebook use affects them rather
positively (Pempek & Calvert, 2009). Another important work by Eugenia & Hugo (2013) reports: “It can help at-
risk students to communicate informally, build a good team spirit, and take more personal responsibility for their
studies (p.28). A research carried out by Gonzales & Hancock (2011) highlights a different aspect of it. The
findings of this research has the evidence to confirm that Facebook use has some positive effects on developing
characteristics of individuals, such as confidence building: “It is possible that Facebook activates the ideal self….
selective self-presentation, afforded by digitally mediated environments can have a positive influence on self-
esteem” (p. 81). Laudone (2012), who is defining Facebook as, “an object of popular culture, in constructing and
maintaining normative expressions of gender, sexuality, relationships and parenting”, points out another positive
effect of Facebook use (pp.176-78).
However, other studies that do not agree with them report that Facebook use have some negative effects
on users. One major study by Paradise & Sullivan (2012) shows that, 20 % of students have experienced
negative effects of Facebook use. The same study also argues that negative content of the profile pages, which
give rise to develop negative feeling leading to negative judgment among friends/partners, is a significant cause
of negative effects of Facebook use (p. 56). Supporting Paradise & Sullivan’s findings, another major study
asserts that Facebook use sometimes cause the users, who read profile pages of other people, to develop
negative judgments about them:
"Constantly reading others’ reported positive life events, as well as frequently seeing others’ pictures of
happy moments, could give Facebook users an impression that others are happy and have good lives… In
contrast to their own life events, which might not always be happy and positive, frequent Facebook users might
perceive that life is not fair…. thus they are more vulnerable to a distorted perception…. They assume that
happiness is a stable characteristic of their temperaments and that they are constantly enjoying good lives (Chou
& Edge, 2012, p. 117)”.
Jealousy seems to be one of the main negative effects of the use of Facebook. A study conducted by
Elphinston & Noller (2011) shows that an individual suspected from his/her partner becomes a heavy user of
Baku, Azerbaijan | 77
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
of
ACADEMIC RESEARCH
Vol.
6
. No.
2
.
March
, 201
4
Facebook. A continuous follow up the partner’s Facebook profile page generally produces a negative judgment
that destroys the relationship (p. 634). Similar to the findings of Elphinston & Noller, Laudone (2012) says:
“Facebook was the cause of insecurities in relationships, where one partner would become jealous or suspicious
over something he/she has seen on the other’s profile (pp.176-78)”.
Reporting on the same issue Darvell, Walsh, & White (2011) say: “Although potentially beneficial, the
openness of Facebook, coupled with such checking and monitoring behavior, may offer a gateway for potentially
problematic partner monitoring to occur” (p. 717). A previous study (2009), consistent with the findings mentioned
above, indicates that Facebook use may trigger a sense of jealousy in partners. As a result of this, a continuous
follow up the Facebook profile of him/her, generally ends up with Facebook addiction (Muise, Christofides, &
Desmarais, 2009, pp. 443-44).
1.2.1. Gender effects in Facebook use
Both males and females use Facebook but their aims and the methods employed are different. According
to Sheldon (2009) females and males basically follow two different ways in using Facebook: “Females used
Facebook to maintain their relationships, to be entertained, and to pass time. Males, on the other hand, used
Facebook to develop new relationships” (p. 54 - 55). A recent study by Thompson & Lougheed (2012) reports that
females used to say Facebook use make them tense and feel distressed if they can’t login Facebook whereas
males say nothing about it (p.95). ). Laudone (2012) looks at the issue from a different angle: “Women, in keeping
with traditional gender roles, tend to be much more worried about the potential for their partner’s to be flirting or
reconnecting with an old flame on Facebook” (pp.176-178). In a previous study (2008), Sheldon mentions that
females use Facebook more often than males. Females, unlike males, login the Facebook whenever they feel
bored or want to entertain themselves (p. 50). Similar with these findings, Gadekar, Krishnatray, & Gaur, (2012)
report that females stay connected longer than males (p. 6).
1.2.2 Personal traits effect in Facebook use
Personal traits may play significant roles in the usage of Facebook of university students. According to
Ryan & Xenos (2011) Facebook user students may be extroverted and narcissistic. The findings of this research
also indicate that Facebook users are possibly the individuals who developed the feeling of loneliness in their
families, on the contrary those who are non-users of Facebook may be inclined to be scrupulous, timid, and
unsocial. Their findings show that every personal trait is related with a certain type of feature of Facebook. As an
example, extroverted students use and stay more longer than the introvert ones (pp. 1261-62). On the contrary,
anxious and shy people are frequent users of Facebook like extroverts but have fewer friends comparing with
them (Kalpidou, Dan Costin, & Morris (2011, p.184). The study conducted by Junghyun & Jong-Eun Roselyn
(2011) reveals that getting social support and self -presentation have an indirect positive relationship. If a student
presents himself honestly in his Facebook profile page there is a possibility of obtaining social support from
Facebook users (p. 361). In another major study on the same issue by Kalpidou, Dan Costin, & Morris (2011) shy
students are reported to stay longer but haven’t got more friends. However, the results of the research carried out
by Ryan & Xenos (2011) are contradictory: “….people with smaller social networks would generally be less
motivated to use a website such as Facebook…. the results show no significant relationship between shyness
and frequency of Facebook use” (pp. 1261-62).
Finally, all these discussions in mind, we can infer that the purpose of using Facebook, the methods
employed and the time spent on Facebook have close relationships with the personal traits of Facebook users.
2. METHODOLOGY
In this section, the research model, the universe, sampling and the instruments used to collect data and the
statistical techniques used in the analysis of the data collected will take place.
2.1. Model of the study
The method to be used in this study is the relational model, the model used for screening. The aim of this
study is to examine the relationship between students' personality traits and the use of Facebook among the
students who study in different faculties of Necmettin Erbakan University and Selcuk University.
2.2. The universe of the study
Research universe will be the students who are studying at Necmettin Erbakan University and Selcuk
University during the academic year 2012-2013.
2.3. The study group
The study group of research will be determined by simple random sample selection. The total number of
the study group will be 501 students (294 females and 207 males) from Necmettin Erbakan University and Selcuk
University.
2.4. Adjective Based Personality Test (ABPT)
Adjective Based Personality Test (ABPT) was developed by Bacanli, Ilhan, & Arslan (2009). ABPT is
composed of five sub-dimensions (emotional stability/neuroticism, extroversion, openness to experiences and
agreeableness and conscientiousness). Principle Component Analysis has been conducted on the data collected
from 285 participants in order to determine the construct validity of ABPT. Analyses have showed that five factor
78 | PART B. SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES www.ijar.eu
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
o
f
ACADEMIC RESEARCH
Vol.
6
. No.
2
.
March
, 201
4
model explains 52.63% of the variance in ABPT. Sociotrophy Scale, Reaction to Conflicts Scale, Negative-
Positive Emotion Scale, and Trait Anxiety Inventory has been used to determine the validity of compliance of
ABPT. Examined in general, it was found that the dimensions of ABPT revealed a moderate and meaningful
construct with the scales used to measure the validity of compliance and these results were important in terms of
the compliance of the validity. Within the context of reliability of ABPT, Internal consistency coefficients of the tool
were calculated on the data collected from the 285 participants and 90 participants were applied ABPT with a two-
week interval. Internal consistency coefficients of the dimensions of ABPT have changed in the range of.89 to.73.
As a result of test-retest analysis, Agreeableness was found to have the highest relationship (r=.86, p<.01) and
Openness to Experiences was found to have the lowest relationship (r=.68, p<.01).
2.5. Facebook Scale
The scale has been developed by Kesici and others, composed of 26 items. The scale is a one-
dimensional scale.
2.6. Data Analysis
Pearson product moment correlation coefficient will be used to determine the relationship between
personality traits and the scale of Facebook. Simple regression analysis technique will be employed in order to
assess the predictive power of personal characteristics of the university students of Facebook scores.
3. FINDINGS
3.1. The relationship between personality traits and the use of Facebook
In view of the results of analysis shown in Table 1, a significant negative relationship was found between
the Facebook use and extroversion (r= -.11, p<.05), openness to experiences (r= -.14, p<.05), agreeableness (r=
-.18, p<.05) and conscientiousness (r= -.20, p<.01) personal traits; no significant relationship was found between
the Facebook use and neurotic (r=.55, p<.01) personality traits.
Table 1. The correlation values that show the relationship between personality traits and use of Facebook
Variables Facebook Neuroticism Extroversion Openness to
experiences Agreeableness Conscientiousness
Facebook 1
Neuroticism -.007 1
Extroversion -.114* .008 1
Openness to experiences -.142* .021 .633* 1
Agreeableness -.183* -.035 .480* .527* 1
Conscientiousness -.200* .009 .527* .405* .573* 1
*p<.05
3.2. Regression analysis on predicting the use of Facebook
Table 2. Simple linear regression analysis results of personality traits related to predict of the Facebook use
Predicted
(Dependent)
Variable
Predictor
INDEPENDENT
variable
B Standard
Error B Beta t p Regression
Results
Use of
Facebook
Neuroticism
-.018
.111
-.007
-.161
.872
R =.007
R2 =.000
F =.026
p>.01
Extroversion
-.215
.085
-.114
-2.542
.011
R =.114
R2 =.013
F = 6.460
p>.01
Openness to
experiences
-.304
.095
-.142
-3.196
.001
R =.142
R2 =.020
F = 10.216
p<.01
Agreeableness
-.361
.087
-.183
-4.139
.000
R =.183
R2 =.034
F = 17.134
p<.01
Conscientiousness
-.478
.105
-.200
-4.547
.000
R =.200
R2 =.040
F = 20.697
p<.01
*p<.01
In view of the results of analysis according to Table 2, while personal traits of openness to experiences
(R2=.020; FReg= 10.216), agreeableness (R2=.034; FReg= 17.134) and conscientiousness (R2=.040; FReg= 20.697)
Baku, Azerbaijan | 79
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
of
ACADEMIC RESEARCH
Vol.
6
. No.
2
.
March
, 201
4
significantly predicted the Facebook use; personal traits of neurotic (R2=.000; FReg=.026) and extroversion
(R2=.013; FReg= 6.460) didn’t predict significantly the Facebook use. Personal traits of openness to experiences
explained 2%, agreeableness about 3%, and conscientiousness 4% of the total variance for the Facebook use.
4. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
Facebook use of university students is related with personal traits of openness to experiences,
agreeableness and conscientiousness. There is a significant relation between Facebook use and students who
have personality traits of openness to experiences, agreeableness and conscientiousness.
According to the data regression analysis shown in Table 2 above, openness to experiences (R2=.020;
FReg= 10.216), agreeableness (R2=.034; FReg=17.134) and conscientiousness (R2=.040; FReg=20.697)
significantly predicted the Facebook use. On the other hand, personal traits of neurotic (R2=.000; FReg=.026) and
extroversion (R2=.013; FReg= 6.460) didn’t predict significantly the Facebook use. Personal traits of openness to
experiences explained 2%, agreeableness about 3%, and conscientiousness 4% of the total variance for the
Facebook use.
REFERENCES
1. Bacanli H., Ilhan T. & Aslan S. (2009). Bes faktor kuramina dayali bir kisilik olceginin gelistirilmesi:
sifatlara dayali kisilik testi (SDKT). Turk Egitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 7 (2), 261-79.
2. Chou H. & Edge N. (2012). 'They Are Happier and Having Better Lives than I Am': The Impact of
Using Facebook on Perceptions of Others' Lives. Cyberpsychology, Behavior & Social Networking,
15(2), 117-121. doi:10.1089/cyber.2011.0324
3. Darvell M.J., Walsh S.P. & White K.M. (2011). Facebook Tells Me So: Applying the Theory of
Planned Behavior to Understand Partner-Monitoring Behavior on Facebook. Cyberpsychology,
Behavior & Social Networking, 14(12), 717-722. doi:10.1089/cyber.2011.0035
4. Elphinston R.A. & Noller P. (2011). Time to Face It! Facebook Intrusion and the Implications for
Romantic Jealousy and Relationship Satisfaction. Cyberpsychology, Behavior & Social Networking,
14(11), 631-635. doi:10.1089/cyber.2010.0318.
5. Eugenia M.W. Ng. & Hugo C.H. Wong.(2013). Facebook: More than social networking for at-risk
students. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of The 2nd International Conference on
Integrated Information. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.02.014.
6. Gadekar R., Krishnatray P. & Gaur S. (2012). A Descriptive study of facebook uses among Indian
students. Media Asia, (3), 140, Retrieved from http://elibrary.bigchalk.com.ezproxy.wsc.edu (07 May
2013).
7. Gonzales A.L. & Hancock J.T. (2011). Mirror, Mirror on my Facebook Wall: Effects of Exposure to
Facebook on Self-Esteem. Cyberpsychology, Behavior & Social Networking, 14(1/2), 79-83.
doi:10.1089/cyber.2009.0411.
8. Hunt D., Atkin D. & Krishnan A. (2012). The Influence of Computer-Mediated Communication
Apprehension on Motives for Facebook Use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(2), 187-
202. doi:10.1080/08838151.2012.678717.
9. Jang Hyun K., Min-Sun K. & Yoonjae N. (2010). An Analysis of Self-Construals, Motivations,
Facebook Use, and User Satisfaction.International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction,
26(11/12), 1077-1099. doi:10.1080/10447318.2010.516726.
10. Junghyun K. & Jong-Eun Roselyn L. (2011). The Facebook Paths to Happiness: Effects of the
Number of Facebook Friends and Self-Presentation on Subjective W ell-Being. Cyberpsychology,
Behavior & Social Networking, 14(6), 359-364. doi:10.1089/cyber.2010.0374.
11. Kalpidou M., Dan Costin D. & Jessica Morris (2011).The relationship between Facebook and the
well-Being of undergraduate college students. Cyberpsychology Behavior and Social Networking.
Volume 14, Number 4. DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2010.0061.
12. Lampe C., Ellison N.B. & Steinfield C. (2008, November). Changes in use and perception of
Facebook. Paper presented at the CSCW ’08, San Diego, California.
13. Laudone S.M. (2012). Identity work on facebook. (Order No. 3512282, Fordham University).
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 226. Retrieved from.http://search.proquest.com/docview/
1024287762?accountid=159111. (1024287762).
14. Muise A., Christofides E. & Desmarais S. (2009). More Information than You Ever Wanted: Does
Facebook Bring Out the Green-Eyed Monster of Jealousy? Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 12(4), 441-
444. doi:10.1089/cpb.2008.0263
15. Paradise A. & Sullivan M. (2012). (In)Visible Threats? The Third-Person Effect in Perceptions of the
Influence of Facebook. Cyberpsychology, Behavior & Social Networking, 15(1), 55-60.
DOI:10.1089/cyber. 2011.0054
16. Pempek T.A., Yermolayeva Y.A. & Calvert S.L. (2009). College students’ social networking
experiences on Facebook. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30:227–38.
17. Ryan T., & Xenos S. (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), 1658-1664. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2011.02.004
80 | PART B. SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES www.ijar.eu
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
o
f
ACADEMIC RESEARCH
Vol.
6
. No.
2
.
March
, 201
4
18. Sheldon P. (2009). Maintain or develop new relationships? Gender differences in Facebook use.
Rocky Mountain Communication Review, 6, 51–56. https://www.humis.utah.edu/humis/docs/
organization_951_1251746183.pdf#page=51.
19. Sheldon P. (2008). The relationship between unwillingness-to-communicate and students’ Facebook
use. Journal of Media Psychology, 20, 67-75. DOI:10.1027/ 18641105.20.2.67.
20. Sponcil M. & Gitimu P. (2012). Use of social media by college students: Relationship to
communication and self-concept. Journal of Technology Research. http://www.aabri.com/
manuscripts/121214.pdf
21. Thompson S.H. & Lougheed E. (2012). Frazzled by Facebook? An exploratory study of gender
differences in social network communication undergraduate men and women. College Student
Journal, 46(1), 88-98.
22. Wilson K., Fornasier S. & White K. M. (2010). Psychological predictors of young adults’use of social
networking sites. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13,173-177.
