International Research Journal of Commerce , Arts and Science

 ( Online- ISSN 2319 - 9202 )     New DOI : 10.32804/CASIRJ

Impact Factor* - 6.2311


**Need Help in Content editing, Data Analysis.

Research Gateway

Adv For Editing Content

   No of Download : 111    Submit Your Rating     Cite This   Download        Certificate

INDIVIDUAL’S PERSONALITY TRAITS PREDICTS THEIR SOCIAL MEDIA USE ON THE INTERNET. - A REVIEW OF THE PSYCHOLOGICAL LITERATURE

    2 Author(s):  DR. URVASHI SHARMA, ANJALI SIWAL

Vol -  10, Issue- 1 ,         Page(s) : 17 - 31  (2019 ) DOI : https://doi.org/10.32804/CASIRJ

Abstract

In the increasingly User-generated Web, users’ personality traits may be crucial factors leading them to engage in this participatory media.The present research examined how big five traitsaremanifested on social networking sites. The literature suggests factors such as extraversion, neuroticism and openness to experience are related to uses of social applications on the Internet. Results revealed that while extraversion and openness to experiences were positively related to social media use, neuroticism is a negative predictor, controlling for socio-demographics and life satisfaction. Open to new experiences emerged as an important personality predictor of social media use.

1. Amichai-Hamburger, Y., Wainpel, G., & Fox, S. (2002). On the Internet no one knows I’m an introvert:Extroversion, introversion, and Internet interaction. CyberPsychology& Behavior, 5(2), 125–128.
2. Amiel, T., & Sargent, S. L. (2004). Individual differences in Internet usage motives. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(6), 711–726.
3. Bargh, J. A., & McKenna, K. Y. A. (2004). The Internet and social life. Annual Review of Psychology, 55,573–590.
4. Bryant, J. A., Sanders-Jackson, A., & Smallwood, A. M. K. (2006), text messaging and adolescent social networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 577–592.
5. Bubas, G. (2006). Competence in computer-mediated communication: An evaluation and potential uses of a self-assessment measure. International Communication Association Conference (pp. 1–38).
6. Dresden, Germany. Butcher, J. N., Graham, J. R., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (1995). Methodological problems and issues in MMPI-I, MMPI-2, and MMPI-A research. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 320–329.
7. Butt, S., & Phillips, J. G. (2008). Personality and self-reported mobile phone use. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(2), 346–360.
8. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992a). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and the NEO Five-Factor inventory (NEO-FFI): Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources Inc.
9. Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook ‘‘friends:” Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-MediatedCommunication, 12(4), 1143–1168.
10. Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 49–74.
11. Landers, R. N., &Lounsbury, J. W. (2006). An investigation of Big Five and narrow personality traits in relation to Internet usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 283–293.
12. Lewis, C., &Fabos, B. (2005). Instant messaging, literacies, and social identities. Reading Research Quarterly, 40(4), 470–501.
13. Mantovani, G. (2001). The psychological construction of the Internet from information foraging to social gathering to cultural mediation. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 4, 47–56.
14. McCrae, R. R. (1992). The five-factor model: Issues and applications [Special issue]. Journal ofPersonality, 60(2).
15. Raacke, J., & Bonds-Raacke, J. (2008). MySpace and Facebook: Applying the uses andgratifications theory to exploring friend-networking sites. Cyberpsychology&Behavior, 11(2), 169–174.
16. Ross, C., Orr, E. S., Sisic, M., Arseneault, J. M., Simmering, M. G., & Orr, R. R. (2009).
17. Personality and motivations associated with Facebook use. Computers in HumanBehavior, 25(2), 578–586.
18. Sax, L. J., Gilmartin, S. K., & Bryant, A. N. (2003). Assessing response rates and non-response bias in web and paper surveys. Research in Higher Education, 44(4), 409–432.
19. Schimmack, U., Shigehiro, O., Furr, R. M., & Funder, D. C. (2008). Personality and lifesatisfaction: A facet-level analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,30(8), 1065–1075.
20. Slutske, W. S., Jackson, K. M., &Sher, K. J. (2003). The natural history of problemgambling from age 18–29. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112(2), 263–274.
21. Tannen, D. (1990). You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation. New York, NY: Ballatine.Valenzuela, S., Park, N., &Kee, K. F. (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), 875–901.
22. Vavreck, L. (2007). The exaggerated effects of advertising on turnout: The dangers of self-reports. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 2(4), 325–343. 
23. Wyllie, A., Zhang, J. F., &Casswell, S. (1998). Positive responses to televised beer advertisements associated with drinking and problems reported by 18 to 29-year-olds. Addiction, 93, 749–760.
24. Zywica, J., &Danowski, J. (2008). The faces of Facebookers: Investigating social enhancement and social compensation hypotheses. Journal of Computer- Mediated Communication, 14(1), 134.

*Contents are provided by Authors of articles. Please contact us if you having any query.






Bank Details