The Impacts of Personality Traits, Use Intensity and Features Use of LinkedIn on Bridging Social Capital

Abstract

This exploratory study examines the effects of LinkedIn users’ personality traits, use intensity, and LinkedIn feature usage patterns on their perceived gained bridging social capital. The data were gathered from a purposive sample of 301 LinkedIn users in mainland China. The results showed that subjects with agreeable personality traits who participate often in the LinkedIn platform to react to and follow professional information from companies perceived that they gained greater bridging social capital. As expected, subjects with extraverted and neurotic personalities were heavier users of LinkedIn and, in particular, they tended to use LinkedIn to react and follow professional information, self-promote expertise, and to engage in strategic professional network building. The implications of the study are also discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Adler, P., & Kwon, S. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27, 17–40. https://doi.org/10.2307/4134367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Amichai-Hamburger, Y., & Vinitzky, G. (2010). Social network use and personality. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1289–1295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Amichai-Hamburger, Y., Wainapel, G., & Fox, S. (2002). On the Internet no one knows I'm an introvert: Extroversion, neuroticism, and Internet interactions. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 5(2), 125–128. https://doi.org/10.1089/109493102753770507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Amichai-Hamburger, Y., Kaplan, H., & Dorpatcheon, N. (2008). Click to the past: The impact of extroversion by users of nostalgic website on the use of internet social services. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1907–1912. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Amiel, T., & Sargent, S. (2004). Individual differences in internet usage motives. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(6), 711–726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Archambault, A., & Grudin, J. (2012). A longitudinal study of Facebook, LinkedIn, & twitter use. CHI’12, May 5–10, 2012, Austin, Texas, USA.

  7. Bargh, J. A., & McKenna, K. Y. A. (2004). The internet and social life. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 573–590. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141922.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Brehm, J., & Rahn, W. (1997). Individual-level evidence for the causes and consequences of social capital. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 999–1023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chou, H. T. G. & Edge, N. (2012). They Are Happier and Having Better Lives than I Am: The Impact of Using Facebook on Perceptions of Others' Lives. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15(2): 117-121. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011.0324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Claybaugh, C. C., & Haseman, W. D. (2013). Understanding professional connections in Linkedln -A question of trust. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 54(1), 94–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S120. https://doi.org/10.1086/228943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Correa, T., Hinsley, A., & de Ziga, H. (2010). Who interacts on the web? The intersection of users’ personality and social media use. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 247–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Devaraj, S., Easley, R. F., & Crant, J. M. (2008). How does personality matter? Relating the five-factor model to technology acceptance and use. Information Systems Research, 19(1), 93–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Donnellan, M. B., Oswald, F. L., Baird, B. M., & Lucas, R. E. (2006). The mini-IPIP scales: Tiny-yet-effective measures of the big five factors of personality. Psychological Assessment, 18(2), 192–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ehrenberg, A., Juckes, S., White, K. M., Walsh, S. P., & Psych, B. (2008). Personality and self-esteem as predictors of young people’s technology use. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 11(6), 739–741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 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(4), 1143–1168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gosling, S. D., Augustine, A. A., Vazire, S., Holtzman, N., & Gaddis, S. (2011). Manifestations of personality in online social networks: Self-reported Facebook-related behaviors and observable profile information. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(9), 483–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Guadagno, R. E., Okdie, B. M., & Eno, C. A. (2008). Who blogs? Personality predictors of blogging. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1993–2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hampton, K., & Wellman, B. (2003). Neighboring in Netville: How the internet supports community and social capital in a wired suburb. City & Community, 2(4), 277–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Invest HK. (2014). LinkedIn expands Hong Kong operations. Retrieved Oct. 2015 from http://www1.investhk.gov.hk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/2016.03-linkedin-en.pdf

  22. Kim, D., Subramanian, S. V., & Kawachi, I. (2006). Bonding versus bridging social capital and their associations with self-rated health: A multilevel analysis of 40 US communities. Journal of Epidermoid Community Health, 60(2), 116–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 49–74.

  24. Lin, N. (2001). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  25. McElroy, J., Hendrickson, A., Townsend, A., & DeMarie, S. (2007). Dispositional factors in internet use: Personality versus cognitive style. MIS Quarterly, 31(4), 809–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Moore, K., & McElroy, J. C. (2012). The influence of personality on Facebook usage, wall postings, and regret. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), 267–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Nie, N. H. (2001). Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the internet: Reconciling conflicting findings. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 420–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ong, E. Y. L., Ang, R. P., Ho, J. C. M., Lim, J. C. Y., Goh, D. H., & Lee, C. S. (2010). Narcissism, extraversion and adolescents’ self-presentation on Facebook. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(2), 180–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Papacharissi, Z. (2009). The virtual geographies of social networks: A comparative analysis of Facebook, LinkedIn, and ASmallWorld. New Media & Society, 11(1–2), 199–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Pew Research Center. (2016). Social Media Update 2016: Facebook usage and engagement is on the rise, while adoption of other platforms holds steady. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/11/11/social-media-update-2016/

  31. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Reis, H. T. (1994). Domains of experience: Investigating relationship processes from three perspectives. In R. Erber & R. Gilmour (Eds.), Theoretical frameworks for personal relationships (pp. 87–110). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

  33. Rosengren, K. (1974). Uses and gratifications: A paradigm outlined. In J. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives (pp. 269–286). Beverley Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Ross, C., Orr, E. S., Sisic, M., Arseneault, J. M., Simmering, M. G., & Orr, R. R. (2009). Personality and motivations associated with Facebook use. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 578–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 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 Behavior, 27(5), 1658–1664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Seidman, G. (2013). Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: How personality influences social media use and motivations. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(3), 402–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Skeels, M. M., & Grudin, J. (2009). When social networks cross boundaries: A case study of workplace use of Facebook and LinkedIn. GROUP’09, May 10–13, Sanibel Island, Florida, USA.

  38. Statista (2017). Statistics and facts about LinkedIn. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/topics/951/linkedin/

  39. Steinfield, C., DiMicco, J. M., Ellison, N. B., & Lampe, C. (2009). Bowling online: Social networking and social capital within the organization. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Communities and Technologies, 245–254. University Park, PA, USA.

  40. Tapscott, D. (2008). Grown up digital: How the net generation is changing your world. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Utz, S. (2016). Is LinkedIn making you more successful? The informational benefits derived from public social media. New Media & Society, 18(1), 2685–2702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Valenzuela, S., Park, N., & Kee, K., F. (2009). Is there social capital in a social network site? Facebook use and college students’ life satisfaction, trust, and participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 875–901.

  43. Van Der Gaag, M. P. J., & Snijders, T. A. B. (2004). Proposals for the measurement of individual social capital. In H. Flap & B. Volker (Eds.), Creation and returns of social capital (pp. 199–218). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Wang, J. L., Jackson, L. A., Zhang, D. J., & Su, Z. Q. (2012). The relationships 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, 28(6), 2313–2319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Wellman, B., Haase, A. Q., Witte, J., & Hampton, K. (2001). Does the internet increase, decrease, or supplement social capital? Social networks, participation, and community commitment. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 436–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Williams, D. (2006). On and off the net: Scales for social capital in an online era. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 593–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Wilson, K., Fornasier, S., & White, K. M. (2010). Psychological predictors of young adults’ use of social networking sites. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13(2), 173–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Louis Leung.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ma, S.Q., Leung, L. The Impacts of Personality Traits, Use Intensity and Features Use of LinkedIn on Bridging Social Capital. Applied Research Quality Life 14, 1059–1078 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-018-9635-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • LinkedIn use intensity
  • Personality
  • Social capital
  • Feature usage patterns