Psychological correlates of online self- presentation and implications for judgement accuracy Dr Helen J. Wall & Dr Linda K. Kaye Edge Hill University, UK Dr Helen J. Wall & Dr Linda K. Kaye Edge Hill University, UK

(Online) Self-presentation  Efforts to present ourselves to others  What we “give” and “give off” (Goffman, 1990)  Individual and contextual factors are related to how much we self-present. E.g.,  Individuals’ own self-presentation concerns (Leary & Allen, 2011)  Audiences of interactions  Private vs public  Closeness of relationships with others  Efforts to present ourselves to others  What we “give” and “give off” (Goffman, 1990)  Individual and contextual factors are related to how much we self-present. E.g.,  Individuals’ own self-presentation concerns (Leary & Allen, 2011)  Audiences of interactions  Private vs public  Closeness of relationships with others

Online contexts  Present interesting platforms for examining these issues  SNSs as a particular focus in ongoing research in the area of self-presentation  Written discourse and interactions (e.g., wall posts, chat features, comments, “Likes”)  Visual presentation (e.g., photo quantity, organisation, content)  Present interesting platforms for examining these issues  SNSs as a particular focus in ongoing research in the area of self-presentation  Written discourse and interactions (e.g., wall posts, chat features, comments, “Likes”)  Visual presentation (e.g., photo quantity, organisation, content)

Emoticons as an aspect of interest  Emoticon usage is particularly interesting to explore on SNSs and other virtual platforms  Functions in CMC as:  Indicator of emotional state/transmitter of emotional expression (Derks et al., 2007)  Communicational aid (Ganster et al., 2012)  Little research however, has explored individual differences in its usage  I.e., why do some people use them more than others? What psychological factors are influential here?  Also- how does usage vary as a function of different virtual contexts?  Emoticon usage is particularly interesting to explore on SNSs and other virtual platforms  Functions in CMC as:  Indicator of emotional state/transmitter of emotional expression (Derks et al., 2007)  Communicational aid (Ganster et al., 2012)  Little research however, has explored individual differences in its usage  I.e., why do some people use them more than others? What psychological factors are influential here?  Also- how does usage vary as a function of different virtual contexts?

Psychological factors

Psychological factors on emoticon usage (Study 1) PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS ONLINE BHEAVIOUR (Emoticon Usage) Personality Self-esteem Social anxiety Self- presentation Behavioural Self-report

Context is key!  Psychologically, we know context is a key determinant of behaviour  The “online context” is therefore no different in this respect  Online behaviours, such as emoticon usage therefore, need to be considered in respect of context  Psychologically, we know context is a key determinant of behaviour  The “online context” is therefore no different in this respect  Online behaviours, such as emoticon usage therefore, need to be considered in respect of context

Psychological factors on emoticon usage (Study 1) PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS ONLINE BHEAVIOUR (Emoticon Usage) Personality Self-esteem Social anxiety Self- presentation Behavioural Self-report

Psychological factors on emoticon usage (Study 1) PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS ONLINE BHEAVIOUR (Emoticon Usage) Personality Self-esteem Social anxiety Self- presentation Behavioural Self-report

Study 1: Results

Psychological factors on self-reported emoticon usage (Study 1) PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS Self-esteem Social anxiety Self-presentation r =.27, p < 05 Extraversion Agreeableness Neuroticism Openness Conscientiousness

Psychological factors on behavioural emoticon usage on Facebook (Study 1) PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS Conscientiousness Extraversion Agreeableness Neuroticism Openness Self-esteem Social anxiety Self-presentation r = -.53, p <.05. r =.53, p <.05

…What do other people think about our online behaviour??? Study 2: Emoticon Usage & Personality Judgement ‘Accuracy’

Study 2: Personality Judgement ‘Accuracy’: Background  Researchers have examined whether judgements made on the basis of online behaviour are ‘accurate’ (i.e., in line with self-view)  Online blogs (Biel, Aran, & Gatica-Perez, 2011)  Your address (Back et al., 2008)  content/writing (Gill et al., 2006)  Online photos (Hancock & Toma, 2009)  Type of avatar created (Belisle & Bodur, 2010)  Researchers have examined whether judgements made on the basis of online behaviour are ‘accurate’ (i.e., in line with self-view)  Online blogs (Biel, Aran, & Gatica-Perez, 2011)  Your address (Back et al., 2008)  content/writing (Gill et al., 2006)  Online photos (Hancock & Toma, 2009)  Type of avatar created (Belisle & Bodur, 2010) When How?

1. How ‘accurate’ are people when rating personality on the basis of viewing online behaviour? 2. How does actual emoticon usage relate to the judgement of another’s personality? 1. How ‘accurate’ are people when rating personality on the basis of viewing online behaviour? 2. How does actual emoticon usage relate to the judgement of another’s personality? Study 2: Personality Judgement ‘Accuracy’: Research Questions

Study 2: Personality Judgement ‘ Accuracy ’: Method SELF-REPORTED PERSONALITY (N = 54 ) ONLINE BHEAVIOUR (Emoticon Usage) Behavioural OBSERVER JUDGEMENTS (N = 7) Extraversion Openness Neuroticism Agreeableness Conscientiousness Extraversion Openness Neuroticism Agreeableness Conscientiousness r -value (self-observer agreement)

PERSONALITY SELF-REPORT PERSONALITY JUDGEMENTS Extraversion Openness Agreeableness Conscientiousness Neuroticism Extraversion Openness Agreeableness Conscientiousness Neuroticism r =.74, p < 001 r = 44, p < 05 r = -.14, p =.51 r = -.03, p =.88 r =.30, p =.16 Study 2 Accuracy Results : Self-Observer Agreement Correlations Extroversion - typically most accurately judged trait (Funder & Colvin, 1988) in FtF contexts Openness - difficult to judge offline but has been shown to be accurately rated online e.g., websites (Vazire & Gosling (2004) Research Question 1

PERSONALITY JUDGEMENTS Extraversion Openness Neuroticism Agreeableness Conscientiousness r =.74, p <.01 r =.63, p <.05 Study 2 Results : Emoticon Usage and Perception Research Question 2

 Openness with ‘other’ emoticons on Facebook  Differences in correlates between S-R & Behavioural data  Although personality was found to relate to usage observers do not appear to use these correctly  linked to perceptions not accuracy  Given accuracy for E and O other cues are clearly important too!  Openness with ‘other’ emoticons on Facebook  Differences in correlates between S-R & Behavioural data  Although personality was found to relate to usage observers do not appear to use these correctly  linked to perceptions not accuracy  Given accuracy for E and O other cues are clearly important too! Discussion Emoticon Usage & Accuracy Discussion Emoticon Usage & Accuracy  Accuracy for E & O aligns with notion of Meta-traits (DeYoung et al., 2002) – PUBLIC-PRVIATE contexts  Plasticity (Extraversion and Openness)- external processes such as exploration of social world  Stability (C, N, & A): internal motivational, emotional components  Worthy of further exploration across different online platforms, additional cues, & multiple rating perspectives  Accuracy for E & O aligns with notion of Meta-traits (DeYoung et al., 2002) – PUBLIC-PRVIATE contexts  Plasticity (Extraversion and Openness)- external processes such as exploration of social world  Stability (C, N, & A): internal motivational, emotional components  Worthy of further exploration across different online platforms, additional cues, & multiple rating perspectives

 If you’re interested…..  Dr Helen Wall :  Dr Linda Kaye :  THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!