1. The Good with the Bad: Facebook as a Source of Belonging, Life Satisfaction, Stress, and Ostracism Stephanie J. Tobin, Eric J. Vanman, Marnize Verreynne, Rosemary Baker, and Alexander K. Saeri The University of Queensland, Australia Social networking websites like Facebook have the potential to meet our belonging needs, but they are also a potential source of stress and ostracism. Some studies have found that greater use of Facebook predicts negative outcomes such as greater negative affect and less satisfaction with life (Kross et al., 2013). Other studies have found that greater use of Facebook is associated with positive outcomes such as greater social capital (Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007) and connection (Sheldon, Abad, & Hinsch, 2011), and lower social loneliness (Ryan & Xenos, 2011). This mixed set of outcomes could lead to some ambivalence about Facebook, which could be why users periodically take “Facebook vacations” in which they voluntarily stop using Facebook for several weeks or more (Rainie, Smith, & Duggan, 2013). It is possible that such vacations help to alleviate stress. We examined this possibility in Study 1. Study 1: Facebook Abstinence Sample 123 active Facebook users (34% male), M age = 22.62 Session 1 Thursday or Friday, between 2pm and 5pm no food, caffeine, exercise for at least 30 minutes before baseline cortisol and life satisfaction (Diener et al., 1985) random assignment to condition no Facebook: do not use Facebook for the next 5 days Facebook normal: use Facebook as normal Session 2 5 days later (Tuesday or Wednesday), between 2 and 5pm cortisol and life satisfaction measures Study 1 revealed that a 5-day period of Facebook abstinence led to lower cortisol, which indicates less stress at a physiological level. However, participants in the no Facebook condition missed out of the increase in life satisfaction reported by the Facebook normal group. In Study 2, we sought to take a more fine grained approach by manipulating the specific activities in which Facebook users engage. Past research has found that active Facebook use (e.g., posting status updates) predicts higher levels of belonging, whereas passive Facebook use (e.g., reading content posted by others) predicts lower levels of belonging (Burke, 2011; Deters & Mehl, 2013; Ryan & Xenos, 2011). In Study 2, we examined the effects of lurking on belonging and related needs. Lurkers are people who visit a website on at least an occasional basis, but who post rarely or not at all (McKenna & Bargh, 1998; Rau, Gao, & Ding, 2008). Sample 89 Facebook users who typically post at least once a week (27% male), M age = 30.67 Session 1 baseline need satisfaction (Gonsalkorale & Williams, 2007) random assignment to condition do-not-post: for the next 2 days, you can log in and read what others post on social networking sites, but do not share any information publicly (no updates, links, photos, comments, likes) post-as-usual: for the next 2 days, continue using social networking sites as you normally would Session 2 2 days later need satisfaction IntroductionStudy 2: LurkingStudy 3: Ostracism Study 2 revealed that belonging and meaningful existence were lower when participants were not allowed vs. allowed to publicly share information on Facebook. However, another potential threat to belonging comes into play when people share information. Past research suggests that a negative response from others could lead to lower belonging (Burke, 2011; Karlen & Daniels, 2011). In Study 3, we examined how a lack of feedback from others could threaten belonging and related needs. Sample 76 undergraduates (35.5% male) Procedure groups of 3-7 participants, including 1 confederate initial questionnaires 7 minute Facebook activity using researcher accounts select a profile picture from the provided set post a status update about something interesting that has happened to you in the last week view and comment on some of the statuses of other participants in the room random assignment to condition no feedback: all other accounts were restricted so the participant’s post was not visible to other participants feedback: no restrictions; confederate always commented need satisfaction (Jamieson, Harkins, & Williams, 2010) Conclusions The current research highlights the costs and benefits of using Facebook. On the one hand, abstaining from vs. using Facebook in Study 1 led to lower cortisol levels (i.e., less stress). On the other hand, abstaining from vs. using Facebook in Study 1 led to lower levels of life satisfaction. Studies 2 and 3 shed light on the specific activities and experiences that affect need satisfaction among Facebook users. Typically active Facebook users in Study 2 who refrained from publicly sharing information experienced lower levels of belonging and meaningful existence than those who shared as usual. Furthermore, participants in Study 3 who publicly shared information but were ignored vs. validated by others experienced lower levels of belonging, self-esteem, control, and meaningful existence. Although using Facebook can create physiological stress, it can also increase life satisfaction. Furthermore, using Facebook to communicate with others can increase belonging and related needs, as long as people receive some validation from others. References Burke, M. (2011). Reading, writing, relationships: The impact of social network sites on relationships and well-being (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA. Deters, F. G., & Mehl, M. R. (2013). Does posting Facebook status updates increase or decrease loneliness? An online social networking experiment. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4, 579- 586. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75. 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-Mediated Communication, 12, 1143-1168. Gonsalkorale, K., & Williams, K. D. (2007). The KKK won't let me play: Ostracism even by a despised outgroup hurts. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 1176-1186. Jamieson, J. P., Harkins, S. G., & Williams, K. D. (2010). Need threat can motivate performance after ostracism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 690-702. Karlen, C. E. and Daniels, J. R. (2011). Cyberostracism and social monitoring: Social anxiety's effects on reactions to exclusion and inclusion online. Unpublished manuscript. Kross, E., Verduyn, P., Demiralp, E., Park, J., Lee, D. S., Lin, N., Shablack, H., Jonides, J., & Ybarra, O. (2013). Facebook use predicts declines in subject well-being in young adults. PLOS ONE, 8(8), e69841- e69841. McKenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. A. (1998). Coming out in the age of the internet: Identity "demarginalization" through virtual group participation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 681-694. Rainie, L., Smith, A., & Duggan, M. (2013). Coming and going on Facebook. Pew Internet & American Life Project, February 5, 2013. Rau, P-L. P., Gao, Q., & Ding, Y. (2008). Relationship between the level of intimacy and lurking in online social network services. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 2757-2770. 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 Behaviour, 27, 1658-1664. Sheldon, K. M., Abad, N., & Hinsch, C. (2011). A two-process view of Facebook use and relatedness need-satisfaction: Disconnection drives use, and connection rewards it. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 766-775. Williams, K. D. (2009). Ostracism: A temporal need-threat model. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. New York: Academic Press, pp. 275-314. Note: Error bars represent the standard error of the mean. Means are adjusted for time 1 need fulfillment. These effects were not moderated by baseline belonging, rejection sensitivity, or others’ approval contingency of self worth. This is consistent with other findings in the ostracism literature (Williams, 2009). Note: Error bars represent the standard error of the mean. SPSP 2014 (Austin, TX), s.tobin@uq.edu.au