Individual differences in social media use for information seeking

Journal of Academic Librarianship

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 171-178

  Kim, Kyung Sun ^a   Sin, Sei Ching Joanna ^b   Tsai, Tien I ^c  

^a University of Wisconsin   (United States)

^b NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

^c NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Information sources; Social media; Undergraduates; User characteristics

Indexed keywords

EID: 84898481501     PISSN: 00991333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.acalib.2014.03.001     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Amichai-Hamburger Y., Vinitzky G. Social network use and personality. Computers in Human Behavior 2010, 26(6):1289-1295.
2. Austria J.L. Developing evaluation criteria for podcasts. Libri 2007, 57(4):179-208.
3. Berthon P.R., Pitt L.F., Plangger K., Shapiro D. Marketing meets Web 2.0, social media, and creative consumers: Implications for international marketing strategy. Business Horizons 2012, 55(3):261-271.
4. Brenner J., Smith A. 72% of online adults are social networking site users 2013, Pew Research Center, Retrieved November 15, 2013, from http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media/Files/Reports/2013/PIP_Social_networking_sites_update.pdf.
5. Bridges L.M. Librarian as professor of social media literacy. Journal of Library Innovation 2012, 3(1):48-65.
6. Carpan C. Introducing information literacy 2.0. College and Undergraduate Libraries 2010, 17(1):106-113.
7. Chesney T. An empirical examination of Wikipedia's credibility. First Monday 2006, 11(11). Retrieved October 9, 2013, from http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_11/chesney/index.html.
8. CIBER Social media and research workflow Retrieved February 18, 2013, from. http://ciber-research.eu/download/20101111-social-media-report.pdf.
9. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences 1988, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. 2nd ed.
10. Collins E., Jubb M. How do researchers in the humanities use information resources?. Liber Quarterly 2012, 21(2):176-187.
11. Colón-Aguirre M., Fleming-May R.A. "You just type in what you are looking for": Undergraduates' use of library resources vs. Wikipedia. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 2012, 38(6):391-399.
12. Correa T., Hinsley A.W., de Zúñiga H.G. Who interacts on the Web?: The intersection of users' personality and social media use. Computers in Human Behavior 2010, 26(2):247-253.
13. Costa P.T., McCrae R.R. Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Manual 1992, Psychological Assessment Resources, Odessa, FL.
14. Cronon W. Scholarly authority in a wikified world Retrieved November 16, 2013, from. http://www.historians.org/Perspectives/issues/2012/1202/Scholarly-Authority-in-a-Wikified-World.cfm.
15. Denning P., Horning J., Parnas D., Weinstein L. Wikipedia risks. Communications of the ACM 2005, 48(12):152.
16. Duggan M., Brenner J. The demographics of social media users, 2012 2013, Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project.
17. Dunaway M. Web 2.0 and critical information literacy. Public Services Quarterly 2011, 7(3-4):149-157.
18. Ehrenberg A., Juckes S., White K.M., Walsh S.P. Personality and self-esteem as predictors of young people's technology use. CyberPsychology and Behavior 2008, 11(6):739-741.
19. Ellison N.B., Steinfield C., Lampe C. The benefits of Facebook "friends": Social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 2007, 12(4):1143-1168.
20. Fallis D. Toward an epistemology of Wikipedia. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2008, 59(10):1662-1674.
21. Fallows D. How women and men use the Internet 2005, 28. Pew Internet & American Life Project, Retrieved October 24, 2013, from http://www.pewInternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Women_and_Men_online.pdf.
22. Farkas M. Information literacy 2.0, American Libraries Retrieved August 20, 2013, from. http://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/columns/practice/information-literacy-20.
23. Gray R., Vitak J., Easton E.W., Ellison N.B. Examining social adjustment to college in the age of social media: Factors influencing successful transitions and persistence. Computers & Education 2013, 67:193-207.
24. Guadagno R.E., Okdie B.M., Eno C.A. Who blogs? Personality predictors of blogging. Computers in Human Behavior 2008, 24(5):1993-2004.
25. Halder S., Roy A., Chakraborty P.K. The influence of personality traits on information seeking behavior of students. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science 2010, 15(1):41-53.
26. Hamburger Y.A., Ben-Artzi E. The relationship between extraversion and neuroticism and the different uses of the Internet. Computers in Human Behavior 2000, 16(4):441-449.
27. Head A.J. Learning the ropes: How freshmen conduct course research once they enter college. Project Information Literacy Research Report 2013, Retrieved December 20, 2013, from http://projectinfolit.org/pdfs/PIL_2013_FreshmenStudy_FullReport.pdf.
28. Head A.J., Eisenberg M.B. How today's college students use Wikipedia for course-related research. First Monday 2010, 15(3). Retrieved November 21, 2013, from http://www.firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2830/2476.
29. Heinström J. From fear to flow: Personality and information interaction 2010, Chandos Publishing, Oxford.
30. Heinström J. Fast surfing, broad scanning and deep diving: the influence of personality and study approach on students' information-seeking behavior. Journal of Documentation 2005, 61(2):228-247.
31. Heinström J. Five personality dimensions and their influence on information behavior. Information Research 2003, 9(1). Retrieved August 11, 2013, from at http://InformationR.net/ir/9-1/paper165.html.
32. Hughes D.J., Rowe M., Batey M., Lee A. A tale of two sites: Twitter vs. Facebook and the personality predictors of social media usage. Computers in Human Behavior 2012, 28(2):561-569.
33. John O.P., Srivastava S. The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. Handbook of personality: Theory and Research 1999, 2:102-138.
34. John O., Naumann L., Soto C. Paradigm shift to the integrative Big-Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues. Handbook of personality: Theory and research 2008, 114-158. Guilford Press, New York, NY. 3rd ed. O.P. John, R.W. Robins, L.A. Pervin (Eds.).
35. Jones S., Johnson-Yale C., Millermaier S., Pérez F.S. U.S. college students' Internet use: Race, gender and digital divides. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 2009, 14:244-264.
36. Kim K.-S., Yoo-Lee E., Sin S.-C.J. Social media as information source: Undergraduates' use and evaluation behavior. Proceedings of the ASIST Annual Meeting 48 2011, Retrieved September 7, 2013, from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/meet.2011.14504801283/full.
37. Kim S., Oh S. Users' reference criteria for evaluating answers in a social Q&A site. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2009, 60(4):716-727.
38. Kwon N., Song H. Personality traits, gender, and information competency among college students. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science 2011, 16(1):87-107.
39. Lampe C., Ellison N., Steinfield C. A face(book) in the crowd: Social searching vs. social browsing. Proceedings of the 2006 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, USA 2006, 167-170. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY. P.J. Hinds, D. Martin (Eds.).
40. Lenhart A., Purcell K., Smith A., Zickuhr K. Social media and mobile internet use among teens and young adults Retrieved October 1, 2013, from. http://www.pewinternet.org//media//Files/Reports/2010/PIP_Social_Media_and_Young_Adults_Report.pdf.
41. Li N., Kirkupb G. Gender and cultural differences in Internet use: A study of China and the UK. Computers & Education 2007, 48(2):301-317.
42. Lim S. How and why do college students use Wikipedia?. Journal of the AmericanSociety for Information Science and Technology 2009, 60(11):2189-2202.
43. Lim S., Kwon N. Gender differences in information behavior concerning Wikipedia, an unorthodox information source?. Library and Information Science Research 2010, 32(3):212-220.
44. Lin K.Y., Lu H.P. Why people use social networking sites: An empirical study integrating network externalities and motivation theory. Computers in Human Behavior 2011, 27(3):1152-1161.
45. Mackey T.P., Jacobson T.E. Reframing information literacy as a metaliteracy. College and Research Libraries 2011, 72(1):62-78.
46. Madden M., Zickuhr K. 65% of online adults use social networking sites Retrieved October 1, 2013, from. http://pewinternet.org//media//Files/Reports/2011/PIP-SNS-Update-2011.pdf.
47. McCrae R.R., Costa P.T. Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1987, 52(1):81-90.
48. Mitchell A., Holcomb J., Page D. News use across social media platforms 2013, Pew Research Center, Retrieved November 30, 2013, from http://www.journalism.org/files/2013/11/News-Use-Across-Social-Media-Platforms1.pdf.
49. Mitrano T. It takes only a generation: Information literacy in the digital age Retrieved October 12, 2013, from. http://www.it.cornell.edu/policies/publications/generation.cfm.
50. Moberg P.J. Linking conflict strategy to the five-factor model: Theoretical and empirical foundations. International Journal of Conflict Management 2001, 12(1):47-68.
51. Moore K., McElroy J.C. The influence of personality on Facebook usage, wall postings, and regret. Computers in Human Behavior 2012, 28(1):267-274.
52. Nadkarni A., Hofmann S.G. Why do people use Facebook?. Personality and Individual Differences 2012, 52(3):243-249.
53. Nicholas D., Watkinson A., Rowlands I., Jubb M. Social media, academic research and the role of university libraries. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 2011, 37(5):373-375.
54. Park J.H. Differences among university students and faculties in social networking site perception and use: Implications for academic library services. Electronic Library 2010, 28(3):417-431.
55. Pempek T.A., Yermolayeva Y.A., Calvert S.L. College students' social networking experiences on Facebook. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 2009, 30(3):227-238.
56. Pew YouTube & news: A new kind of visual journalism Retrieved October 3, 2013, from. http://www.journalism.org/analysis_report/youtube_news.
57. Ross C., Orr E.S., Sisic M., Arseneault J.M., Simmering M.G., Orr R.R. Personality and motivations associated with Facebook use. Computers in Human Behavior 2009, 25(2):578-586.
58. Ryan T., Xenos S. Who uses Facebook? An investigation into the relationship between the Big Five, shyness, narcissism, loneliness, and Facebook usage. Computers in Human Behavior 2011, 27(5):1658-1664.
59. Shade L.R. Bending gender into the net: Feminizing content, corporate interests, and research strategy. Society online: The internet in context 2004, 57-70. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. P.N. Howard, S. Jones (Eds.).
60. Shaw D. Wikipedia in the newsroom: Some journalists find it very valuable as a road map to troves of valuable information. American Journalism Review 2008, 30(1):40-45. Retrieved October 1, 2013, from http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4461.
61. Sheeja N.K. Science vs social science: A study of information-seeking behavior and user perceptions of academic researchers. Library Review 2010, 59(7):522-531.
62. Sin S.-C.J., Kim K.-S. International students' everyday life information seeking: The informational value of social networking sites. Library and Information Science Research 2013, 35(2):107-116.
63. Sin S.-C.J., Kim K.-S., Yang J., Park J.-A., Laugheed Z. International students' acculturation information seeking: Personality, information needs and uses. Proceedings of the ASIS&T Annual Meeting 2011, vol. 48.
64. Smith A., Rainie L., Zickuhr K. College students and technology 2011, Pew Research Center, Retrieved October 1, 2013, from http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/College-students-and-technology/Report.aspx.
65. Song H., Kwon N. The relationship between personality traits and information competency in Korean and American students. Social Behavior and Personality: an International Journal 2012, 40(7):1153-1162.
66. Spiranec S., Zorica M.B. Information Literacy 2.0: Hype or discourse refinement?. Journal of Documentation 2010, 66(1):140-153.
67. Stutzman F. An evaluation of identity-sharing behavior in social network communities. Paper presented at the iDMAa and IMS Code Conference, Oxford, OH, April 3-8, 2006 2006.
68. Stvilia B., Twidale M., Smith L.C., Gasser L. Information quality work organization in Wikipedia. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2008, 59(6):983-1001.
69. Surowiecki J. The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies and nations 2004, Doubleday, New York.
70. Wallace D.P., Fleet C.V. The democratization of information? Wikipedia as a reference resource. Reference & User Services Quarterly 2005, 45(2):100-103.
71. Wanberg C.R., Kammeyer-Mueller J.D. Predictors and outcomes of proactivity in the socialization process. Journal of Applied Psychology 2000, 85(3):373-385.
72. Waters N.L. Why you can't cite Wikipedia in my class. Communications of the ACM 2007, 50(9):15-17.
73. Weiler A. Information-seeking behavior in Generation Y students: Motivation, critical thinking, and learning theory. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 2005, 31(1):46-53.
74. Witek D., Grettano T. Information literacy on Facebook: An analysis. Reference Services Review 2012, 40(2):242-257.
75. Xiang Z., Gretzel U. Role of social media in online travel information search. Tourism Management 2010, 31(2):179-188.
76. Yang C., Brown B.B. Motives for using Facebook, patterns of Facebook activities, and late adolescents' social adjustment to college. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 2013, 42(3):403-416.
77. Zywica J., Danowski J. The faces of Facebookers: Investigating social enhancement and social compensation hypotheses; predicting Facebook™ and offline popularity from sociability and self-esteem, and mapping the meanings of popularity with semantic networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 2008, 14(1):1-34.