Advertisement

Exploring Theoretical Concepts for Explaining Sharing in the Social Media Environment

  • Cherniece J. Plume
  • Emma L. Slade
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9844)

Abstract

The concept of sharing has been amplified with the development of various social media platforms that enable consumers to share knowledge with each other and subsequently influence their attitudes and purchase intentions. However, recent studies have tended to utilise social psychological theories to explore sharing on social media and have concentrated on the behaviour of those that share rather than the underlying individual motivations that lead them to share. This paper outlines some of the theories used within the current sharing literature and suggests that combining uses and gratifications theory and self-construal theory is better suited to examining the underlying motivations of sharing.

Keywords

Uses and gratifications Sharing Motivations Social media Self-construal 

References

  1. 1.
    Fehr, E., Bernhard, H., Rockenbach, B.: Egalitarianism in young children. Nature 454(7208), 1079–1083 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Osatuyi, B.: Information sharing on social media sites. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29, 2622–2631 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wang, X., Yu, C., Wei, Y.: Social media peer communication and impacts on purchase intentions: a consumer socialization framework. J. Interact. Mark. 26, 198–208 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K.P., Walsh, G., Gremler, D.D.: Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: what motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the internet? J. Interact. Mark. 18(1), 38–52 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chiu, C.-M., Hsu, M.-H., Wang, E.T.G.: Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: an integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decis. Support Syst. 42, 1872–1888 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Oh, S., Syn, S.Y.: Motivations for sharing information and social support in social media: a comparative analysis of Facebook, Twitter, Delicious, YouTube, and Flickr. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 66(10), 2045–2060 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ye, S., Chen, H., Jin, X.: Exploring the moderating effects of commitment and perceived value of knowledge in explaining knowledge contribution in virtual communities. In: The Tenth Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, pp. 239–254 (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Munar, A.M., Jacobsen, J.K.S.: Motivations for sharing tourism experiences through social media. Tour. Manag. 43, 46–54 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Baumeister, R.F., Leary, M.R.: The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychol. Bull. 117(3), 497–529 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ma, W.W.K., Yuen, A.H.K.: Understanding online knowledge sharing: an interpersonal relationship perspective. Comput. Educ. 56, 210–219 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sicilia, M., Delgado-Ballester, E., Palazon, M.: The need to belong and self-disclosure in positive word-of-mouth behaviours: the moderating effect of self-brand connection. J. Consum. Behav. 15, 60–71 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Boardman, A.E., Greenberg, D.H., Vining, A.R., Weimer, D.L.: Cost-benefit analysis: concepts and practice, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pai, P., Tsai, H.-T.: Reciprocity norms and information-sharing behaviour in online consumption communities: an empirical investigation of antecedents and moderators. Inf. Manag. 53, 38–52 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shi, Z., Rui, H., Whinston, A.B.: Content sharing in a social broadcasting environment: evidence from Twitter. MIS Q. 38(1), 123–142 (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Weijo, H., Hietanen, J., Mattila, P.: New insights into online consumption communities and netnography. J. Bus. Res. 67, 2072–2078 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ryan, R.M., Deci, E.L.: Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new directions. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 25, 54–67 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Aitken, R., Gray, B., Lawson, R.: Advertising effectiveness from a consumer perspective. Int. J. Adv. 27(2), 279–297 (2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rubin, A.M.: The uses-and-gratifications perspective of media effects. In: Bryant, J., Zillmann, D. (eds.) Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research, pp. 525–548. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Katz, E., Blumler, J.G., Gurevitch, M.: Utilization of mass communication by the individual. In: Blumler, J.G., Katz, E. (eds.) The Uses of Mass Communications: Current Perspectives on Gratifications Research, vol. 3, pp. 19–32. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills (1974)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ruggiero, T.E.: Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass Commun. Soc. 3(1), 3–36 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Boyd, D.: Why youth (heart) social network sites: the role of networked publics in teenage social life. In: Buckingham, D. (ed.) Youth, Identity, and Digital Media, pp. 119–142. MIT Press, Cambridge (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Karnik, M., Oakley, I., Venkatanathan, J., Spiliotopoulos, T., Nisi, V.: Uses and gratifications of a Facebook media sharing group. In: Understanding People’s Practices in Social Networks, 23–27 February, San Antonio, Texas, USA, CSCW, pp. 821–866. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Barton, K.M.: Reality television programming and diverging gratifications: the influence of content on gratifications obtained. J. Broadcasting & Electron. Media 53(3), 460–476 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    McQuail, D.: Mass Communication Theory. Sage Publications, London (1983)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Morgan, R.M., Hunt, S.D.: The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. J. Mark. 58(7), 20–38 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Keller, K.L., Lehmann, D.: How do brands create value? Mark. Manag. 5(May/June), 27–31 (2003)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dodds, B.W., Monroe, K.B., Grewal, D.: Effect of price, brand, and store information on buyers product evaluation. J. Mark. Res. 28(3), 307–319 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hofstede, G.: Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. Sage Publications, Newbury Park (1980)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Markus, H.R., Kitayama, S.: Culture and the self: implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychol. Rev. 98, 224–253 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Millan, E., Reynolds, J.: Self-contruals, symbolic and hedonic preferences, and actual purchase behavior. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 21, 550–560 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zhang, Y., Shrum, L.J.: The influence of self-construal on impulsive consumption. J. Consum. Res. 35, 838–850 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Brown, J., Broderick, A.J., Lee, N.: Word of mouth communication within online communities: conceptualising the online social network. J. Interact. Mark. 21(2), 2–20 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wasko, M.M., Faraj, S.: Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Q. 29(1), 35–57 (2005)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Burke, M., Marlow, C., Lento, T.: Feed me: motivating newcomer contribution in social network sites. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 945–954. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wang, S., Noe, R.A.: Knowledge sharing: a review and directions for future research. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 20, 115–131 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kim, J.H., Kim, M.-S., Nam, Y.: An analysis of self-construals, motivations, Facebook use, and user satisfaction. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 26(11-12), 1077–1099 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Villi, M., Moisander, J., Joy, A.: Social curation in consumer communities: consumers as curators of online media content. Adv. Consum. Res. 40, 490–495 (2012)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Chu, S.-C., Kim, Y.: The determinants of consumer engagement in electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) in social networking sites. Int. J. Advert. 30(1), 47–75 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ManagementSwansea UniversitySwanseaUK

Personalised recommendations