Professional Documents
Culture Documents
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264388484
CITATION READS
1 731
2 authors, including:
Christina Boutsouki
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
52 PUBLICATIONS 236 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Christina Boutsouki on 05 December 2014.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
Int. J. Internet Marketing and Advertising, Vol. X, No. Y, xxxx 1
1 Introduction
Social media has been described as a powerful promotional and personalised tool
(Okazaki and Taylor, 2013) as it enables users to create and promote their own content.
The effects of social media on communication have been of such magnitude that they are
characterised as the new revolution in communication (Patino et al., 2012). Consumers,
by developing their personal online networks (Lin and Lu, 2011), have the ability to
instantly communicate with each other (Correa et al., 2010) and with their favourite
brands, transforming the traditional company-consumer relationship (Christodoulides
et al., 2011). This network interaction empowers customers, enables control of the
dissemination of information and renovates communication. Companies, on the other
hand, are facing a powerful promotional tool that enables them to interact with their
prospective customers that are easily traceable and open to communication.
Research, up to now, has extensively investigated the role of social media in
marketing (Keenan and Shiri, 2009; Lewis et al., 2008; Ross et al., 2009; Lin and Lu,
2011; Fraser and Dutta, 2008; Harris and Rae, 2009; Kaplan and Haenlein, 2010; Laroche
et al., 2012, 2013), the way consumers interact with social media (Ellison et al., 2007,
2010; Lenhart, 2009; Lewis et al., 2008; Mangold and Faulds, 2009; Ross et al., 2009;
Singh and Sonnenburg, 2012; Thackeray et al., 2008) and how personality characteristics
of college students and adults are related to the use of social networking sites (SNSs)
(Gangadharbatla, 2008; Steinfield et al., 2008; Ross et al., 2009; Amichai-Hamburger and
Vinitzky, 2010; Correa et al., 2010; Moore and McElroy, 2011; Wang et al., 2012a,
2012b; Qiu et al., 2012). In particular, internet self-efficacy, need to belong, and
collective self-esteem were found to have positive effects on attitudes toward SNS
(Gangadharbatla, 2008). College students and adults who appear to be more extraverted
were considered more likely to use the SNSs (status update, comment, add friends)
(Amichai-Hamburger and Vinitzky, 2010; Correa et al., 2010; Moore and McElroy,
2011). According to Ross et al. (2009), extraverts are more likely to use Facebook as a
social tool, however, they do not use Facebook as an alternative to social activities.
Although the effect of personality characteristics on SNSs usage has been extensively
examined in the case of college students and adults, teenagers are a rather neglected
group.
Nevertheless, teenagers belong to the age group that is most likely to go online and
use the SNSs (Lenhart et al., 2010). Teenagers seem to be well aware of digital
technologies and prefer those devices that make content easily accessible, shareable,
while being convenient and handy to use (Hundley and Shyles, 2010). Livingstone (2008)
examined teenagers’ use of SNSs in terms of intimacy, privacy and self-expression and
indicated age to be a significant factor affecting online behaviour. Younger teens tend to
portray a highly-decorated, stylistically-elaborate identity, while older teens tend to
portray an identity lived through authentic relationships with others. Moreover, according
to Boyd (2008) SNSs are ‘networked publics’ where spaces and audiences (in this case
teenagers) are bound together through technological networks (the internet, mobile
networks, etc.). In networked publics, teenagers form and enact their social identities.
Baker and White (2010) utilised the theory of planned behaviour, which postulates that
individuals’ intentions are the proximal determinants of their behaviour. This has been
extensively applied to predict a variety of behaviours. They supported that considering
adolescents’ perceptions of what their friends are doing and the behaviours that they
adopt is very important in order to predict their engagement in frequent SNS use. Dunne
Facebook usage among teenagers 3
et al. (2010) used the uses and gratifications theory to explore the underlying reasoning
for young girls’ (12–14 years) use and participation in SNSs. They suggested that young
girls are active participants in order to portray and manage their desired identity and
persona in a social context. Additionally, both men and women of traditional college age
seem to be equally engaging in this form of online communication. However, although
personality characteristics and peer group pressure have been identified as factors
affecting online behaviour, their effect on SNSs use by teenagers remains unexplored.
The advent of digital technologies and their increasing adoption by teenagers
highlight the need to comprehend how teen communities have been affected by the social
media (Quan-Haase and Boyd, 2011). Spending more than $200 billion in the USA
(products bought by and for teens) (Statistic Brain, 2012), these avid SNSs users seem to
be tremendously valuable for advertisers and marketers. Teenagers, who seem to
influence their family’s spending, are expected to increase their expenditure on product
and services in the near future and are considered trendsetters (Zollo, 1995). Moreover,
teenagers seem to train their parents and grandparents on the use of mobile devices, the
social media and other online technologies (Martin and Bush, 2000). Teenagers comprise
a large proportion of our population, and their technology use is an indication of future
trends. Today’s teens are coming of age with the rapid development of advanced
communication and media tools (Schiano et al., 2002). It is, therefore, of critical
importance for companies to be able to identify their customers’ needs and at the same
time effectively communicate with them.
Adolescence is designated as a period of growth and change in personality or
behaviour. Teenagers build their identities based on role models that they usually find
among their parents, peers and the society in general. Personality characteristics and peer
influences have been found to shape consumers’ behaviour (Kassarjian, 1971; Raju,
1980; Schaninger and Sciglimpaglia, 1891; Bearden et al., 1989; Plummer, 2000).
Therefore, by examining teenagers’ personality and peer group pressure, advertisers will
be able to understand the way teenagers think, act, behave, handle emotions, and
socialise. In examining the practices of teenagers on SNSs, the focus has been given
primarily on Facebook, which was launched in 2004, and has quickly become one of the
most popular tools for social communication with over 1.15 billion users (Facebook,
2013). Moreover, Facebook is somewhat different from other SNSs as it demonstrates an
offline-to-online trend, which means that the majority of ‘Facebook friends’ are
acquaintances from the offline world and not strangers (Ross et al., 2009). With a
constantly increasing number of teenagers going online and creating SNS profiles
(Lenhart et al., 2010), it becomes intriguing to identify the profile of SNS teenage users
and the potential influence of personality characteristics and peer group pressure on this
interaction.
It is, therefore, the objective of the present study to address teenagers’ behaviour
towards the social media and, in particular, Facebook, based on their personality
characteristics and their peer influence. Teenagers’ personality characteristics are
measured in terms of extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability,
and openness to experience. Peer group pressure is based on informational, utilitarian and
value expressive statements. The study was conducted in schools in a small town and a
metropolitan city in Greece. Greece provides an excellent laboratory for study as the
change is recent and of significant magnitude. Internet penetration rate exceeds 54% of
the population and almost 60% of its use takes the form of posting messages to social
media (Eurostat, 2012). Social networking usage increased in the last five years by
4 E. Vlachopoulou and C. Boutsouki
almost 500%, with one in two Greeks using at least one SNS, and Facebook being the
most popular choice especially among teenagers (Focus Bari, 2012).
interactions, people try to convey who they are through their bodies, movements, speech,
clothes and facial expressions, sometimes failing to communicate what they intended
(Boyd, 2008; Correa et al., 2010; Hudges et al., 2012). Online, they get across their
personalities through the information they share (Amichai-Hamburger et al., 2004).
Previous research has shown a relationship between users’ personality and SNS use.
In particular, a number of studies suggested that college students and adults who appear
to be more extraverted were considered more likely to use the SNSs (status update,
comment, add friends) (Amichai-Hamburger and Vinitzky, 2010; Correa et al., 2010;
Moore and McElroy, 2011). Ross et al. (2009) indicated that extraverts are more likely to
use Facebook as a social tool, however, they do not use Facebook as an alternative to
social activities. SNS are quickly becoming one of the most popular tools for
social interaction and information exchange. By examining the personality correlates
(neuroticism, extraversion, openness-to-experience, agreeableness, conscientiousness,
sociability and need-for-cognition) of social and informational use of the two largest
SNS: Facebook and Twitter. Hudges et al. (2012) showed that personality was related to
online socialising and information seeking/exchange. In their study, a preference for
Facebook or Twitter was also associated with differences in personality. The impact of
personality characteristics on SNSs usage has been examined thoroughly among college
students and adults, but not among teenagers.
According to Boyd (2008), teens’ social identity is partially defined by themselves
and partially by others. Digital technologies are a significant way for teenagers to express
their identities (Schau and Gilly, 2003). While users build their profile on a standard
Facebook template, they still have the option to personalise it to a certain extent based on
the information they choose to publish (photos, videos, comments, shared links, liking
pages, etc) (Boyd, 2008). Zhao et al. (2008) investigated the identity construction on the
newly emerged anonymous online environment, Facebook, and they found that Facebook
users portrait their identities implicitly rather than explicitly; they ‘show rather than tell’.
Boyd (2008) suggested that teens tend to introduce themselves in a well-received way as
their primary Facebook audience consists of offline peers (school, sport activities, etc).
Livingstone (2008) suggested that teenagers tend to recreate a highly-decorated,
stylistically-elaborate identity.
Dunne et al. (2010) employed the uses and gratifications theory in order to explore
the use and participation in SNSs by young people. The U and G theory studies the
gratifications or benefits that attract and hold audiences to various types of media and
content that satisfy their social and psychological needs (O’Donohoe, 1994; Cantril,
1942). As a result, Dunne et al. (2010) suggested that teenagers get engaged in SNSs in
order to create an identity and experiment with it. They advocate that teenagers believe
that through a SNS profile they can portray and manage an ideal self and be sheltered
from any kind of embarrassment and rejection. Based on the uses and gratifications
theory, Raake and Bonds-Raake (2008) also indicated that the vast majority of students
use these friend-networking sites for a significant portion of their day for reasons such as
making new friends and locating old friends.
In the present study, in order to examine the effect of teenagers’ personality
characteristics on SNS usage, the five-item personality scale (Gosling et al., 2003) was
used by examining extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability,
and openness to experience. More specifically, it is suggested that teenagers, who are
more extraverted, tend to use Facebook more because the extraverts tend to express their
6 E. Vlachopoulou and C. Boutsouki
feelings, socialise and spend more time with their friends either offline or online. Thus,
the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 1 Extraversion in teenagers is positively related to Facebook usage.
3 Methodology
3.2 Measures
Social media usage was measured using the Facebook media intensity scale (Dunne
et al., 2010) (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.781). This measure includes Likert-scale questions in
order to measure the emotional connection of teenagers with Facebook and the extent to
which Facebook has been integrated into their daily lives (responses categories ranged
from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Furthermore, self-reported assessments
are included to record Facebook behaviour, such as the number of Facebook friends and
the average time spent daily on Facebook (Table 1). The Facebook media intensity scale
was related to personality and peer group pressure.
Table 1 Descriptive statistics
44% of the respondents visited Facebook on a daily basis, 40% had more than
400 friends on Facebook, 20% spent up to 15 minutes and 24% spent more than
80 minutes on Facebook on a weekly basis. These statistics depicted two groups of
Facebook profile owners; those who visited Facebook on a daily basis and spent
significant time browsing, and those who visited Facebook many times per day but spent
less time per visit.
Regarding the main reasons for having a SNS profile, the most important reason for
teenagers is the ability to remain in touch with their friends (84%) and chat with them
(84%) (Table 2). Online behaviour seems to be accommodating to ‘offline’ life,
indicating that extraversion could form a significant motive for a teenager to create a SNS
profile. This is also supported by previous research, indicating that teens mainly use SNS
to stay in touch with their offline friends (Pfeil et al., 2009).
The main activities that teenagers tend to prefer in SNSs are ‘liking’ photos and
videos (52%), commenting on a friend’s message (43%), checking their friends’ photos
and videos (44.5%) and playing games (44%) (Table 2). The results indicate two groups
of users, the ‘content consumers’ and the ‘content developers’. The ‘content consumers’
spend most of their time ‘watching’ what others do on Facebook, such as commenting on
friends’ wall, watching what their friends do (their posts, photos, and videos), and
playing games. However, the ‘content developers’ have a more active role such as:
updating their profiles, posting photos or videos, sending messages to their friends,
tagging their friends on photos or posts or videos, posting links of anything they like,
‘liking’ photos or videos, meeting new friends, creating groups or fan pages or events,
and expressing their opinions or feelings.
4 Results – discussions
Previous research has not yet thoroughly examined the impact of teenagers’ personality
characteristics and peer group pressure on Facebook usage intensity. The present study
examines the way in which teenagers experience social life on Facebook, and identify the
way personality characteristics and peer group pressure are shaping teenagers’ social
networking on Facebook. Internet penetration rate exceeds 54% of the population and
almost 60% of its use takes the form of posting messages to social media (Eurostat,
2012). Social networking use increased in the last five years by almost 500%, with one in
two Greeks using at least one SNS, and Facebook being the most popular choice
especially among teenagers (Focus Bari, 2012). In examining the practices of teenagers
on SNSs, the focus has been given primarily on Facebook, which was launched in 2004
and has quickly become one of the most popular tools for social communication with
over 1.15 billion users (Facebook, 2013). Moreover, Facebook seems to be somewhat
different from other SNSs as it demonstrates an offline-to-online trend, meaning that the
majority of ‘Facebook friends’ are people known from the offline world and not new
people (Ross et al., 2009).
Out of the 600 Greek teenagers that participated in the study, 567 provided usable
questionnaires (Table 1). Respondents were evenly distributed across gender (47% girls
and 53% boys), and place (58% from a metropolitan city and 42% from a small town). In
terms of the use of digital devices 80% of the sample owned both a mobile phone and a
PC, 57% owned a smart phone and 82% accessed their social media profile through a PC.
10 E. Vlachopoulou and C. Boutsouki
Moreover, almost every respondent (94%) had a Facebook profile and 17% had a
Google+ account as well indicating the significant exposure of Greek teenagers to SNSs.
Multiple regression analysis with peer group pressure and the five personality factors
as the independent variables and Facebook intensity as the dependent variable was used
to test the effect of personality and peers on Facebook use (Table 3). The group
independent variables significantly affected Facebook intensity (F = 23.546, p < 0.001,
accounting for 28% of the total variance).
Being positively related to Facebook use (E = 0.16), extraversion seems to be a
significant characteristic that affects teenagers’ online behaviour. Teenagers who tend to
be sociable and have a large ‘friend list’ spend more hours on Facebook and share more
personal information with their online peers. This outcome is consistent with previous
studies that looked into the behaviour of college students and adults. Agreeableness and
openness to experience although positively related to Facebook usage were not
significantly affecting teenagers’ behaviour. Conscientiousness, on the other hand, was
negatively related (E = –0.11) to Facebook intensity, which can be supported by the fact
that teenagers, who tend to be organised, systematic, thorough and conscientious with
their tasks, prefer not to spend a lot of time on social activities.
Table 3 Effect of peer group pressure and personality characteristics on Facebook use
Facebook intensity
Peer_group_pressure 0.246**
I see myself as extraverted (extraversion) 0.161**
I see myself as agreeable, kind (agreeableness) 0.022
I see myself as dependable, organised (conscientiousness) –0.108*
I see myself as emotionally stable, calm (emotional stability) –0.028
I see myself as open to experience, imaginative (openness to experience) 0.045
R squared 26.5
Notes: *p < 0.05, ** p < 0.001.
Therefore, the first hypothesis H1 is supported, ‘Extraversion seems to be positively
related to Facebook usage’.
Peer group pressure (E = 0.25) is also positively related to Facebook intensity. Almost
a third of the sample owned a Facebook profile because their friends had one (utilitarian
component). They feel insecure about their personal image, their decisions and their peer
acceptance, which make them very susceptible to friends’ beliefs and actions (value
expressive component). Therefore, hypothesis H2 Teenagers who tend to be influenced
by the peer group pressure tend to use Facebook more is also supported (p < 0.001).
Facebook use among teenagers exceeded that of any other SNS. The majority of the
respondents (94%) had a Facebook. Almost half the respondents visited Facebook on a
daily basis and had a lot of online friends (>400). Another trend identified in teenagers’
behaviour related to the time spent on activities in Facebook. Two main groups were
identified, those who spent up to 15 minutes checking and updating information (20%)
and those who were more involved in content creation and spent more than 80 minutes on
Facebook on a weekly basis (24%). Both groups interacted on a daily basis. The first
group visited Facebook many times per day but spent less time per visit, whereas the
second visited Facebook mainly once a day and spent significant time browsing.
However, there were no significant demographic differences among the two groups,
Facebook usage among teenagers 11
indicating that regardless the mode of use, Facebook is holding strong among Greek
teenagers.
Online behaviour seems to be accommodating to ‘offline’ life, indicating that
extraversion could form a significant motive for a teenager to create a SNS profile. This,
in accordance with previous research, is indicating that teens among other users mainly
employ SNS to stay in touch with their offline friends (Pfeil et al., 2009). Moreover, Ross
et al. (2009), suggested that the majority of ‘Facebook friends’ are acquaintances, people
known from the offline world and not new ‘cyberfriends’.
Teenagers tend to create groups of friends on Facebook that match those groups of
their offline friends. They might join Facebook and create a profile because their friends
are already online (33%) or because a friend invites them to. Boyd (2008) also suggested
that teenagers typically learn about Facebook through their friends and they join
following a friend’s invitation. Once networked, they seem to make heavy use of the
social media. Lenhart (2009) asserted that the vast majority of teenagers who use social
media goes online daily, possibly trying to get in touch with friends. Hence, peer group
influence and acceptance seems to shape teenagers’ presence in social media and
Facebook in particular.
Another difference identified among teenagers who use Facebook refers to the level
of involvement and type of use. Two groups of users were identified, the ‘content
consumers’ and the ‘content developers’. The ‘content consumers’ tend to spend most of
their time ‘watching’ what others do on Facebook, what their friends do (their posts,
photos, and videos), commenting on friends’ wall and playing games. The ‘content
developers’ assume a more active role such as, updating their profiles, posting photos or
videos, sending messages to their friends, tagging their friends on photos or posts or
videos, posting links of anything they like, meeting new friends, creating groups or fan
pages or events, and expressing their opinions or feelings. However, no statistically
significant differences among the demographic characteristics of the teenagers in these
two groups were recorded. This could be attributed to the limited sample in terms of the
location used and the type of schools.
5 Limitations
A main limitation of the study was the use of a convenience sample. However, this was
inevitable since in order to proceed with the survey, it was important to have access to
schools. Hence, the study was limited to those schools that granted access and gave
permission to interview their students. This resulted in a limited group of participants
(600 students). A more widespread selection of schools and cities would help verify the
findings of the study and possibly indicate further differences among the personality
characteristics of teenagers.
Also, the ‘reference group’ scale used in the study was originally designed to record
peer group influence upon brand selection. A more customised scale on peer group
pressure and social media selection would help precisely indicate the elements that affect
teenagers’ online behaviour.
Moreover, it would be interesting to have a more widespread selection of schools
participating in the study. Differences in the students’ socio-economic background based
on the type of school they attend (public or private) and the area they live might indicate
diverse behavioural patterns.
12 E. Vlachopoulou and C. Boutsouki
With millions of people going online on a daily basis and creating SNSs profiles, it
becomes intriguing to identify the profile of users and the potential influence of personal
characteristics on their interaction with social media. Sometimes the way users behave on
the internet portrays the way they behave in the real world and conveys their
personalities. Valuable personal information is widely available to all parties involved in
this communication process. Teen communities in particular, being accustomed to the
digital technology, and at the same time eager to explore the world, find themselves
exposed to the new digital world and are greatly affected by the social media. Teenagers
belong to the age group that is the most likely to go online and use the SNSs (Lenhart
et al., 2010). At the same time companies are keen on knowing and engaging teenagers
with their brands as future customers who are expected to shape the market’s growth.
Hence, the advent of digital technologies and their increasing adoption by teenagers
highlight a whole new area of research for scholars (Quan-Haase and Boyd, 2011). Being
able to explain how teen communities have been affected by the social media means that
they will be able to indicate new and more efficient ways to communicate with them and
predict future behaviour.
By examining teenagers’ personality and peer group pressure, advertisers will be able
to understand the way teenagers think, act, behave, handle emotions, and socialise. The
present study helps advertisers understand teenagers’ behaviour towards the social media
and identify the most effective way to communicate with them through their advertising
campaigns around the world. Spending more than $200 billion in the USA (products
bought by and for teens) (Statistic Brain, 2012), these avid SNSs users seem to be
tremendously valuable for advertisers and marketers.
Further investigation of teenagers’ attitude towards the SNSs will help marketers to
understand their needs and concerns better and will lead to more targeted and
personalised campaigns. Future research could also shed more light on the teenagers’ use
of social media through a fairly new and highly invasive tool, the mobile phone, as the
new market trend seems to be ‘the mobilisation’ of the internet.
References
Amichai-Hamburger, Y, Wainapel, G. and Fox, S. (2004) ‘On the internet no one knows I am an
introvert’, Cyber Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp.125–128.
Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2002) ‘Internet and personality’, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 18,
No. 1, pp.1–10.
Amichai-Hamburger, Y. and Vinitzky, G. (2010) ‘Social network use and personality’, Computers
in Human Behavior, Vol. 26, No. 6, pp.1289–1295.
Baker, R. and White, K. (2010) ‘Predicting adolescents’ use of social networking sites from an
extended theory of planned behaviour perspective’, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 26,
No. 6, pp.1591–1597.
Bandura, A. (1977) Social Learning Theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Bearden, W., Netemeyer, R. and Teel, J. (1989) ‘Measurement of consumer susceptibility to
interpersonal influence’, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp.473–481.
Boyd, D. (2008) ‘Why youth (heart) social networking sites: the role of networked publics in
teenage social life’, in Buchingham, D. (Ed.): Youth, Identity and Digital Media, MIT Press,
Cambridge, pp.119–142.
Facebook usage among teenagers 13
Brown, B.B., Clasen, D.R. and Eicher, S.E. (1986) ‘Perceptions of peer pressure, peer conformity
dispositions, and self-reported behavior among adolescents’, Developmental Psychology,
Vol. 22, No. 4, pp.521–530.
Cantril, H. (1942) ‘Professor quiz, a gratifications study’, in Lazarsfeld, P.F. and Stanton, F.N.
(Eds.): Radio Research 1941, Duell, Sloan and Pearce, New York, NY, pp.31–45.
Christodoulides, G., Jevons, C. and Blackswaw, P. (2011) ‘The voice of the consumer speaks
forcefully in brand identity: user-generated content forces smart marketers to listen’, Journal
of Advertising Research, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp.101–111.
Common Sense (2012) Social Media, Social Life: How Teens View Their Digital Lives [online]
https://www.commonsensemedia.org/research/social-media-social-life-how-teens-view-their-
digital-lives (accessed 15 January 2013).
Correa, T., Hinsley, W. and Zunica, H. (2010) ‘Who interacts on the web?: the intersection of
users’ personality and social media use’, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 26, No. 2,
pp.247–253.
Dunne, A., Lawlor, M.A. and Rowley, J. (2010) ‘Young people’s use of online social networking
sites – a uses and gratifications perspective’, Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing,
Vol. 4, No. 1, pp.46–58.
Ellison, N., Steinfield, C. and Lampe, C. (2007) ‘The benefits of facebook ‘friends’: social capital
and college students’ use of online social network sites’, Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp.1143–1168.
Ellison, N., Steinfield, C. and Lampe, C. (2010) ‘Connection strategies: social capital implications
of Facebook-enabled communication practices’, New Media & Society, Vol. 10, No. 5,
pp.1–20.
Eurostat (2012) [online] http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STAT-12-185_en.htm (accessed
15 January 2013).
Facebook (2013) [online] http://www.facebook.com (accessed 2 July 2013).
Fischer, C.S. (1982) To Dwell Among Friends: Personal Networks in Town and City, The
University of Chicago Press, Ltd., London.
Focus Bari (2012) [online]
http://www.focus.gr/synedria/InfoComWorld%202012_Presentation%20Anna%20Karadimitri
ou.pdf (accessed 15 January 2013).
Fraser, M. and Dutta, S. (2008) Throwing Sheep in the Boardroom: How Online Social Networking
Will Transform’ Your Life, Work and World, Wiley, Chichester.
Gangadharbatla, H. (2008) ‘Facebook me: collective self-esteem, need to belong, and internet
self-efficacy as predictors of the iGeneration’s attitudes toward social networking sites’,
Journal of Interactive Advertising, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp.5–15.
Gosling, S.D., Rentfrow, P.J. and Swann, W.B.J. (2003) ‘A very brief measure of the big five
personality domains’, Journal of Research in Personality, Vol. 37, No. 6, pp.504–528.
Hargittai, E. (2008) ‘Whose space? differences among users and non-users of social networking
sites’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp.276–297. Comment [t4]: Author: Please
confirm the year of publication whether
Harris, L. and Rae, A. (2009) ‘Social networks: the future of marketing for small business’, Journal 2007 or 2008. There is conflict in your
of Business Strategy, Vol. 30, No. 5, pp.24–31. provided amendment (2008 in the text
Hudges, D., Rowe, M., Batey, M. and Lee, A. (2012) ‘A tale of two sites. Twitter vs Facebook and while 2007 in the list)
personality predictors on social media usage’, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 28, No. 2,
pp.561–569.
Hundley, H. and Shyles, L. (2010) ‘US teenagers’ perceptions and awareness of digital technology:
a focus group approach’, New Media & Society, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp.417–433.
Kaplan, A.M. and Haenlein, M. (2010) ‘Users of the world, unite! the challenges and opportunities
of social media’, Business Horizons, Vol. 53, No. 1, pp.59–68.
Kassarjian, H. (1971) ‘Personality and consumer behaviour: a review’, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp.409–418.
14 E. Vlachopoulou and C. Boutsouki
Keenan, A. and Shiri, A. (2009) ‘Sociability and social interaction on social networking websites’,
Library Review, Vol. 58, No. 6, pp.438–450.
Kirchler, E., Palmonari, A. and Pombeni, M.L. (1994) ‘Social categorization processes as
dependent on status differences between groups: A step into adolescents’ peer-groups’,
European Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 24, No. 5, pp.541–563.
Laroche, M., Habibi, M.R. and Richard, M.O. (2013) ‘To be or not to be in social media: how
brand loyalty is affected by social media?’, International Journal of Information Management,
Vol. 33, No. 1, pp.76–82.
Laroche, M., Habibi, M.R.M. and Sankaranarayanan, R. (2012) ‘The effects of social media based
brand communities on brand community markers, value creation practices, brand trust and
brand loyalty’, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 28, No. 5, pp.1755–1767.
Lenhart, A. (2009) Teens and Social Media. Pew Internet & American Life Project [online]
http://www.pewinternet.org/Presentations/2009/17-Teens-and-Social-Media-An-
Overview.aspx (accessed 10 November 2012).
Lenhart, A. Purcell, K. Smith, A. and Zickuhr, K. (2010) Social Media and Young Adults’, Pew
Internet & American Life Project [online] http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Social-
Media-and-Young-Adults.aspx (accessed 10 March 2013).
Lewis, K., Kaufman, J., Gonzalez, M., Wimmer, A. and Christakis, N. (2008) ‘Tastes, ties, and
time: a new social network dataset using Facebook.com’, Social Networks, Vol. 30, No. 4,
pp.330–342.
Lin, K. and Lu, H. (2011) ‘Why people use social networking sites: an empirical study integrating
network externalities and motivation theory’, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 27, No. 3,
pp.1152–1161.
Livingstone, S. (2008) ‘Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: teenagers’ use of
social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression’, New Media & Society,
Vol. 10, pp.393–411.
Mangold, W.G. and Faulds, J.W. (2009) ‘Social media: the new hybrid element of the promotion
mix’, Business Horizons, Vol. 52, pp.357–365.
Martin, C. and Bush, A. (2000) ‘Do role models influence teenagers’ purchase intentions and
behavior?’, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp.441–453.
Moore, K. and McElroy, J. (2011) ‘The influence of personality on Facebook usage, wall postings
and regret’, Computers in Human Behaviour, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp.267–274.
O’Donohoe, S. (1994) ‘Advertising uses and gratifications’, European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 28, Nos. 8/9, pp.52–75.
Okazaki, S. and Taylor, C. (2013) ‘Social media and international advertising: theoretical
challenges and future directions’, International Marketing Review, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp.56–71.
Palaniswamy, U. and Ponnuswami, I. (2013) ‘Social changes and peer group influence among the
adolescents pursuing under graduation’, International Research Journal of Sciences, Vol. 2,
No. 2, pp.1–5.
Park, C.W. and Lessig, P.V. (1977) ‘Students and housewives: differences in susceptibility to
reference group influence’, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp.102–110.
Patino, A., Pitta, D. and Quinones, R. (2012) ‘Social media’s emerging importance in market
research’, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp.233–237.
Pfeil, U., Arja, R. and Zaphiris, P. (2009) ‘Age differences in online social networking – a study of
user profiles and the social capital divide among teenagers and older users in MySpace’,
Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp.643–654.
Plummer, J. (2000) ‘How personality makes a difference’, Journal of Advertising Research,
Vol. 40, No. 6, pp.79–84.
Purcell, K. (2012) ‘Teens 2012: truth, trends and myths about teen online behavior’, Pew Internet
& American Life Project [online] http://pewinternet.org/Presentations/2012/July/Teens-2012-
Truth-Trends-and-Myths-About-Teen-Online-Behavior.aspx (accessed 15 November 2012).
Facebook usage among teenagers 15
Qiu, L., Lin, H. Ramsay, J. and Yang, F. (2012) ‘You are what you tweet: personality expression
and perception on Twitter’, Journal of Research in Personality, Vol. 46, No.6, pp.710–718.
Quan-Haase, A. and Boyd, D. (2011) ‘Teen communities’, in Barnette, G. (Ed.): Encyclopedia of
Social Networking, Sage, London [online]
http://www.danah.org/papers/2011/TeenCommunitiesDRAFT.pdf (accessed 15 January 2012).
Raake, J. and Bonds-Raake, J. (2008) ‘MySpace and Facebook: applying the uses and gratifications
theory to exploring friend-networking sites’, CyberPsychology and Behaviour, Vol. 11, No. 2,
pp.169–174.
Raju, P.S. (1980) ‘Optimum simulation level. Its relationship to personality, demographics and
exploratory behavior’, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp.272–282.
Ross, C., Orr, E., Sisic, M. Arseneault, J., Simmering, M. and Orr, R. (2009) ‘Personality and
motivations associated with Facebook use’, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 25,
No. 2, pp.578–586.
Santor, D. Messervey, D. and Kusumakar, V. (2000) ‘Measuring peer pressure, popularity and
conformity in adolescent boys and girls: predicting school performance, sexual attitudes and
substance abuse’, Journal of Youth and Adolescence, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp.163–182.
Schaninger, C. and Sciglimpaglia, D. (1981) ‘The influence of cognitive personality traits and
demographics on consumer information acquisition’, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 8,
No. 2, pp.208–216.
Schau, H. and Gilly, M. (2003) ‘We are what we post? self-presentation in personal web space’,
Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp.385–404.
Schiano, D., Chen, C.P., Ginsberg, J., Gretarsdottir, U., Huddleston, M. and Isaacs, E. (2002) ‘Teen
use of messaging media’, Extended Abstracts on Human factors in Computing Systems,
pp.594–595.
Singh, S. and Sonnenburg, S. (2012) ‘Brand performances in social media’, Journal of Interactive
Marketing, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp.189–197.
Statistic Brain (2012) Teenage Consumer Spending Statistics [online]
http://www.statisticbrain.com/teenage-consumer-spending-statistics/
(accessed 25 October 2013).
Steinfield, C., Ellison, N. and Lampe, C. (2008) ‘Social capital, self-esteem, and use of online
social network sites: a longitudinal analysis’, Journal of Applied Development Psychology,
Vol. 29, No. 6, pp.434–445.
Thackeray, R. Neiger, B.L. Hanson, C.L. and McKenzie, J.F. (2008) ‘Enhancing promotional
strategies within social marketing programs: use of Web 2.0 social media’, Health Promotion
Practice, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp.338–343.
Veloutsou, C. and McAlonan, A. (2012) ‘Loyalty and or disloyalty to a search engine: the case of
young Millennials’, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp.125–135.
Wang, J., Jackson, L., Zhang, D. and Su, Z. (2012a) ‘The relationship among the big five
personality factors, self-esteem, narcissism, and sensation-seeking to Chinese University
students’ uses of social networking sites (SNSs)’, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 28,
No. 6, pp.2313–2319.
Wang, X., Yu, C. and Wei, Y. (2012b) ‘Social media peer communication and impacts on purchase
intentions: a consumer socialization framework’, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 26,
No. 4, pp.198–208.
Woodall, G. and Colby, C. (2011) ‘Social media vs. focus groups for qualitative research’ [online]
http://www.greenbook.org/marketing-research/social-media-versus-focus-groups-qualitative-
research-03914# (accessed 15 March 2013).
Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S. and Martin, J. (2008) ‘Identity construction on Facebook: digital
empowerment in anchored relationships’, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 24, No. 5,
pp.1816–1836.
Zollo, P. (1995) Wise Up to Teens, New Strategists Publications, Inc., Ithaca, NY.