Murat KEZER1 Barış SEVİ1, Zeynep CEMALCILAR1, & Lemi BARUH2

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Maternal Psychological Control: Links to Close Friendship and Depression in Early Adolescence Heather L. Tencer Jessica R. Meyer Felicia D. Hall University.
Advertisements

Study examined associations between adolescent information management (disclosure & secrecy), parenting behaviors (solicitation & rules), and adolescent.
Scaling and Attitude Measurement in Travel and Hospitality Research Research Methodologies CHAPTER 11.
Student Engagement Survey Results and Analysis June 2011.
Thy Pham HDP 150 HOW SOCIAL MEDIA HAS AFFECTED OUR COMMUNICATION AND IN TURN OUR RELATIONSHIPS.
電管碩一 R 凌伊亭 Social Media Use In a Mobile Broadband Environment : Examination of Determinants of Twitter and Facebook Use International Journal of.
L 1 Chapter 12 Correlational Designs EDUC 640 Dr. William M. Bauer.
Friends (Temporarily) Forever: Frequency of Facebook Use, Relationship Satisfaction, and Perception of Friendship Zack Hayes, Jerad Hill, Heather Jacobson,
The role of spatial abilities and age in performance in an auditory computer navigation task Presenter: Yu-Chu Chen Adviser: Ming-Puu Chen Date: June 8,
Methods Participants & Procedures Participants were draw from a larger study that included rd, 4 th, and 5 th grade students and sixty seven teachers.
Internet Self-Efficacy Does Not Predict Student Use of Internet-Mediated Educational Technology Article By: Tom Buchanan, Sanjay Joban, and Alan Porter.
Deep Dyadic Friendships vs. Broad Peer Preference During Adolescence as Predictors of Adolescent and Adult Internalizing Symptoms Rachel K. Narr & Joseph.
Chris Bjornsen Department of Psychology,
Are Happy People Found in Connected Neighborhoods
Better to Give or to Receive?: The Role of Dispositional Gratitude
The Effect of Social Media on Sexual Cognitions and Behaviors
Attachment style and condom use across and within dating relationships
Discussion & Conclusion
Chrysalis Wright & Mark Rubin
Priming of Landmarks During Object-Location Tasks:
Florida International University, Miami, FL
Student’ Views About the Use of Facebook and WhatsApp on Education: A Survey Among the Undergraduate Students of Dr. Birinchi Kumar Barooah College Prepared.
The Relationship Between Instagram Photo Editing and Undergraduate College Women’s Body Dissatisfaction Madeline Wick, Cindy Miller-Perrin, & Jennifer.
RESILIENCE AS A MEDIATOR OF STRESSFUL LIFE EVENTS AND SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING, EXISTENTIAL REGRET, AND PHYSICAL HEALTH IN OLDER ADULTS Gary T. Reker, Ph.D.
Relationship-Contingencies and Mate Retention Behavior
Music Selectivity & Sexual Risk
Society for the Scientific Study of Religion
Created by Ryan Smith, MSW PPS
GLOBAL MEANING AS A MEDIATOR OF STRESSFUL LIFE EVENTS, REGRETS IN LIFE, AND HEALTH IN OLDER ADULTS Gary T. Reker, Ph.D. Department of Psychology, Trent.
Sexual Imagery & Thinking About Sex
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION.
Exploratory Factor Analysis Participants, Procedures, & Measures
Cross-over, Degendering, or…?
Blessing Marandure, DeMontfort University
Effects on Couples’ Post-Conflict Intimacy
Are Happy People Found in Connected Neighborhoods
Chapter 7: Interpersonal Relationships
Tamara L. Sims, MA1, Jeanne L. Tsai, PhD1 and Mary K
STEM Communal Affordances
Kenny C. Chee & Marian M. Morry
Participants & Procedure
Friendship Quality as a Moderator
Justin D. Hackett, Benjamin J. Marcus, and Allen M. Omoto
Examining the Utility of the Theory of Planned Behavior
Krystle Lange & Regan A. R. Gurung University of Wisconsin, Green Bay
The Influence of Protective Factors on Perceived Impact of Adverse Childhood Experiences Laura Kenny, MPHc Thomas Jefferson University Background Results.
Linguistic Predictors of Cultural Identification in Bilinguals
To use or not to use? An exploration of cannabis use motives and constraints Dr Liz Temple
A STUDY ON THE USAGE OF SOCIAL MEDIA AMONG MIZORAM UNIVERSITY STUDENTS WHO VISIT THE CENTRAL LIBRARY B. Lalhlimpuii Assistant Librarian Mizoram University.
Smart Portal To Protect Child Online
Introduction Results Methods Conclusions
Do Social Games Help Us Get Socialized
2University of Virginia
Does Adolescent Attachment Security Have Long-term Implications for Functioning in Adulthood? Leah Grande, Joseph S. Tan, Joseph P. Allen, & Alison Nagel.
Introduction Results Conclusions Method
Social Practical Charlie.
2University of Virginia
Emily A. Davis & David E. Szwedo James Madison University Introduction
Lauren A. Barlotta & David E. Szwedo James Madison University
Prosocial Behaviors in Adolescence
Are There Different Types of Online Research Impact?
Review of Older Adults and Their Behaviors in Online Communities
Korey F. Beckwith & David E. Szwedo James Madison University
The Effects of Childhood Emotional Abuse on Later Romantic Relationship Outcomes: The Moderating Role of Self-Worth, Alcohol, and Jealousy Madeline M.
Kristin E. Gross & David E. Szwedo James Madison University
Introduction Results Discussion Hypotheses Method
Tracy L. Tylka, Ph.D., FAED ohio state university
Introduction Measures Results Hypotheses Conclusions Method
Morgan M. Welch & David E. Szwedo James Madison University
How do we think, feel, and behave towards children
Presentation transcript:

Murat KEZER1 Barış SEVİ1, Zeynep CEMALCILAR1, & Lemi BARUH2 Age Differences in Privacy Attitudes, Literacy and Privacy Management on Facebook* Murat KEZER1 Barış SEVİ1, Zeynep CEMALCILAR1, & Lemi BARUH2 1Koç University, Department of Psychology, 2Koç University, Department of Media and Visual Arts Results Introduction Information Disclosure Behavior on Facebook: 8 items. Never (0) - more than once a day (5), e.g., “How often do you write about your feelings or emotions?” Online Privacy Literacy: 8 items. E.g., “A company can tell that you have opened an email even if you do not respond.” Multidimensional Privacy Orientation Scale: 18-item scale from Baruh & Cemalcilar (2014) Privacy Protective Measures on Facebook: 11 items based on Baruh & Cemalcilar (2014) and Litt (2013), e.g., Untagged photos/videos on Facebook because you were concerned about privacy. We also asked the number of years they had been using the Internet their daily Internet use separately for work days and weekends the frequency of their use of various social media platforms (e.g., Facebook, Instagram) the number of friends on their Facebook account percentage of Facebook friends with whom they never met in person Mature adults reported using the Internet less frequently during the weekends than younger age groups Welch’s F(2, 130.14) = 9.659, p < .001. Number of friends decreasing by age groups Welch’s F(2, 134.78) = 9.687, p < .001. Young adults were more likely to utilize Facebook for social interaction purposes F(2, 518) = 5.793, p < .01 and satisfying social curiosity F(2, 518) = 11.527, p < .01. Table 2. Comparison of age groups in terms of internet and SNS use   Young Adulthood Middle Adulthood Mature Adulthood F η2 (ω2) Internet Use Years of Internet use 8.26 (2.46) 8.44 (2.47) 8.23 (2.36) .348NS .001 Internet hours per work day 4.49 (2.93) 4.57 (2.87) 3.75 (2.31) 2.576NS .006 Internet hours per weekend day 5.18 (2.91)a 5.42 (2.77)a 3.77 (2.40)b 9.659 .033 Social Media (Frequency) Facebook 4.29 (1.13)a 4.05 (1.28)b 3.56 (1.47)b 5.543 .017 Twitter 1.46 (1.95)a .74 (1.35)b .29 (.74)c 1.449 .063 Photo Share 1.42 (1.54)a .58 (.93)b .35 (.97)b 20.300 .069 Video Share 2.61 (1.68)a 1.67 (1.33)b 1.10 (1.30)c 24.523 .083 Facebook Network Number of Friends 250.63 (229.69)a 205.82 (218.72)a 117.08 (159.91)b 9.697 .034 Percent of Facebook friends not met in person (mean percent) 29.85 (30.70) 36.05 (34.08) 35.31 (33.39) 1.850NS .003 FB Uses and Gratifications Entertainment 2.64 (.92) 2.67 (.90) 2.36 (1.07) 2.411NS .009 Social interaction 1.84 (1.08)a 1.62 (1.02)a,b 1.27 (1.01)b 5.793 .022 Social curiosity 1.77 (1.04)a 1.34 (.91)b 1.21 (.92)b 11.527 .043 Information seeking 2.22 (1.09) 2.23 (1.00) 2.03 (1.16) .823NS Note. Sample n’s for the age groups vary as follows depending on missing values in specific variables: Young Adulthood: n = 131 to 138; Middle Adulthood: n = 319 to 330; Mature Adulthood: n = 48 to 50. All F values other than with a superscript of NS are significant at p <.05 level. Different superscripts in a row denote columns that are significantly different. No significant differences among age groups for the belief that privacy is a right, F(2, 518) = 0.966, p > .05 and concern about one’s own privacy, F(2, 518) = 0.816, p > .05. Age groups significantly differed from each other in terms the belief that their own privacy is contingent on the extent to which other people around them are careful about protecting their own privacy (other-contingent privacy), Welch’s F(2, 134.54) = 13.125, p < .001 and in terms of valuing the privacy of others, F(2, 517) = 6.115, p < .01. Privacy management has emerged as a key research area in current literature (Zhang & Leung, 2014). Self-disclosure and privacy protection constitute two related privacy management strategies (Walrave, Vanwesenbeeck, & Heirman, 2012). As for the predictors of these behaviors, privacy literacy, concerns and attitudes have been identified as salient factors. Yet, there is considerable disagreement as to the respective predictive ability of these factors (e.g., Taddicken, 2014). Additionally, given age differences in SNS usage patterns (Van den Broeck et al., 2015) a comparative analysis of the respective influence of privacy literacy, attitudes and concerns on privacy management behavior across different age groups is needed. Information disclosure partially mediated the relationship between age groups and privacy management., Young adults were more likely than both of the older age groups (B = -0.50, p < .001) and mature adults were less likely than both of the younger age groups (B = -0.25, p < .05) to engage in information disclosure on Facebook. Those who disclosed more were more likely to take privacy protective measures on Facebook (B = .56, p < .01). The model explained 16% of the variance in privacy protection measures (p < .001). Young Adults (18-40 Years) vs. Middle or Mature Adults (40+ Years) Number of Privacy Protective Measures Taken on Facebook Information Disclosure on FB Young or Middle Adults (18-65 Years) Mature Adults (65+ Years) B = -0.50*** B = -0.25* B = -1.15*** B = - 0.66 B = 0.56** Age groups were significantly different from each other in terms of both disclosure on Facebook Welch’s F(2, 132.81) = 19.729, p < .001 and use of privacy protection measures on Facebook, F(2, 515) = 15.222, p < .001. No significant differences among age groups for the belief that privacy is a right, F(2, 518) = 0.966, p > .05 and concern about one’s own privacy, F(2, 518) = 0.816, p > .05. Age groups significantly differed from each other in terms the belief that their own privacy is contingent on the extent to which other people around them are careful about protecting their own privacy (other-contingent privacy), Welch’s F(2, 134.54) = 13.125, p < .001 and in terms of valuing the privacy of others, F(2, 517) = 6.115, p < .01. Table 3. Mean comparisons by age groups: information sharing and privacy protective behavior on Facebook, privacy literacy and privacy attitudes.   Young Adulthood Middle Adulthood Mature Adulthood F η2 Information disclosure on FB 1.18 (1.10)a .68 (.69)b .42 (.55)c 19.729 .067 Privacy protect. measures on FB 5.55 (3.16)a 4.12 (2.90)b 3.26 (3.22)b 15.222 .056 Online privacy literacy 5.45 (1.36) 5.69 (1.45) 5.76 (1.59) 1.601NS .006 Privacy Attitudes Privacy as a right 4.10 (.77) 4.16 (.72) 4.03 (.65) .966NS .004 Concern about own privacy 3.36 (.97) 3.41 (.86) 3.55 (.77) .816NS .003 Other-contingent privacy 3.17 (.90)a 3.44 (.81)b 3.80 (.67)c 13.125 .045 Concern about privacy of others 3.99 (.71)a 4.21 (.61)b 4.14 (.50)a,b 6.115 .023 Note. Sample n’s for the age groups vary as follows depending on missing values in specific variables: Young Adulthood: n = 137 to 138; Middle Adulthood: n = 329 to 330; Mature Adulthood: n = 50. All F values other than with a superscript of NS are significant at p <.05 level. Different superscripts in a row denote columns that are significantly different. Figure 1. Multicategorical (sequential) mediation model for the direct and indirect effect of age on privacy management on Facebook, Note. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01 Age interacted significantly with all four dimensions of privacy attitudes: 1) belief in privacy as a right, F(3, 515) = 8.993, p < .001, partial η2 = 0.05; 2) concern about one’s own informational privacy, F(3, 515) = 16.893, p < .001, partial η2 = 0.09; 3) other contingent privacy, F(3,515) = 11.489, p < .001, partial η2 = 0.06; and 4) concern about privacy of others, F(3,515) = 7.338, p < .001, partial η2 = 0.04. As shown in Figure 2 thru Figure 5, the impact of privacy attitudes on use of measures to protect privacy on Facebook is generally stronger for mature adulthood groups. Purpose We compare three age groups based on lifespan stages of Kail & Kavanaugh (2010) (18-40, 40-65, 65+) in terms of their privacy literacy, privacy concerns and attitudes, and investigate how these factors predict their respective self-disclosure and privacy protective behavior on Facebook. Conclusion Method Results were generally consistent with previous research. In terms of privacy paradox, results may indicate that older adults do not perceive as strong a need for utilizing these measures as younger adults do. All dimensions of privacy attitudes are positively related to adoption of privacy protection measures on Facebook, none of them were significantly related to disclosure behavior. Approaching attitudes about privacy as a multidimensional construct has provided important results and insights. Participants 600 Mturk participants from USA. 518 respondents reported using Facebook. Measures Facebook Uses and Gratifications: Four types of uses of Facebook (Chen, 2011; Whiting & Williams, 2013), e.g., “to learn about daily lives of other people”, “to be up to date about current events”, “to expand my circle”, “to have fun”. References Kail, R., & Cavanaugh, J. (2010). Human development: A life-span view. Cengage Learning. Taddicken, M. (2014). The “Privacy Paradox” in the social web: The impact of privacy concerns, individual characteristics, and the perceived social relevance on different forms of self- disclosure. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(2), 248–273. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12052 Van den Broeck, E., Poels, K., & Walrave, M. (2015). Older and wiser? Facebook use, privacy concern, and privacy protection in the life stages of emerging, young, and middle adulthood. Social Media+ Society, 1(2). doi:10.1177/2056305115616149 Walrave, M., Vanwesenbeeck, I., & Heirman, W. (2012). Connecting and protecting? Comparing predictors of self-disclosure and privacy settings use between adolescents and adults. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 6(1). doi:10.5817/CP2012-1-3 Zhang, Y., & Leung, L. (2014). A review of social networking service (SNS) research in communication journals from 2006 to 2011. New Media & Society, 17(7), 1007–1024. *Kezer, M., Sevi, B., Cemalcilar, Z., & Baruh, L. (2016). Age differences in privacy attitudes, literacy and privacy management on Facebook. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 10(1).