Facebook Profiles and Usage as Indicators of Personality

20 Honors Colloquium

The Social Network

Facebook has…• Become the most visited site in the U.S.

• Changed social interactions– Unique venue– Self-presentation– Impression management– Picture and profile info are

replacing face-to-face

interactions

Facebook Profiles & Users’ Personalities

• Vazire & Gosling (2004) studied users’ personalities conveyed through identity claims

– Accurate interpretation of the user’s personality.

– Extraversion- positively over scored by the observers

– Provide just as much information about individuals’

personalities as their bedroom or office

Facebook Profiles & Users’ Personalities

• Gosling, Gaddis & Vazire (2007) focused on “Big 5” traits and user’s profile & sample of pictures

– Observer consensus: all “Big Five” traits

– Observer accuracy: not emotional stability

– Users’ awareness: only extraversion

– Self-enhancement: emotional stability and

openness to experience

One’s Past & FutureEarly adolescence (13-14) Early twenties (20-22)

• More adjusted use social network websites• Signs of depression post inappropriate pictures

(Mikami, Szwedo, Allen, Evans, & Hare, 2010)

Romantic Cues• Listed “Interested in…” post “Single”• “Single” relationship status is most important

(Young, Dutta & Dommety, 2009)

Students & Facebook• Intentionally misrepresent themselves to gain

social acceptance (Peluchette & Karl, 2010)

• Establish an identity & use photos to express themselves (Calvert, Pempeki, & Yermolayen, 2009)

• Post pictures to form an image (Peluchette & Karl, 2010)

– hardworking – sexually appealing, wild, or offensive

Sharing Pictures• 87% of college students & recent grads commonly share

pictures on Facebook– Social gatherings (Watkins & Lee, 2010)

• Profile Pictures– Extraverts different style (black & white, altered colors,

or graphically edited) (Kramer & Winter, 2008)

• Background of Picture– A viewer’s rating of a person’s face in a photo is influenced

more by the emotional valence of the background, than by the person’s facial expression. (Koji & Fernandes, 2010)

Importance• Research needs to catch up with this new

venue and its effects on social interactions

• This new medium has a lasting fingerprint– Users may not be aware of the impressions they

are making– Profiles seen by broad audience– Can’t modify the behaviors of their “friends”

Profile Picture• Very influential to forming one’s image

• Most widely viewed part of one’s profile – Hide

• User has complete control– Others can tag pictures, comment on pictures,

post comments on wall or status

– Untag a picture or delete a comment

Personality Traits“Big 5” – 5 dimensions that “represent the core

description of human personality” (Ciccarelli & White, 2010)

Focused on:• Extraversion

• Conscientiousness

• Emotional Stability

Hypotheses1. Extraverts are more likely to display a photo from a

social scene.

2. Individuals who score low on conscientiousness are more likely to have a picture from a social scene.

3. Emotionally stable individuals are less likely to frequently change their profile photo.

MethodsRecruiting participants

• Email to all members of Class of 2014• Join group on Facebook– Closed privacy settings

• Participate in the survey event

Sample

• Bryant University Class of 2014

• 170 participants (56% male, 44% female)

–Access to 59 profiles (71% male, 29% female)

• Age 18 – 20 (M=18.33, SD=.53)

Personality Survey• The Big 5 Mini-Markers Survey (Saucier, 1994)

• Each trait is correlated with eight items– 1 (extremely inaccurate) – 9 (extremely accurate)– Averaged ratings

• Participants with missing data were omitted from analyses for that trait

Extraversion Conscientiousness Emotional Stability

Talkative Organized Unenvious

Extroverted Efficient Relaxed

Bold Systematic Moody*

Energetic Practical Jealous*

Shy* Disorganized* Temperamental*

Quiet* Sloppy* Envious*

Bashful* Inefficient* Touchy*

Withdrawn* Careless* Fretful*

Specific attributes associated with Extraversion, Conscientiousness, and Emotional Stability, from the Big 5 Mini-Markers Survey (Saucier, 1994).

*Indicates those items which are negatively correlated with the trait and were reverse scored.

Facebook Usage Questions• Frequency

– Change pic, update status, check profile, “like” pages, join groups

• Friends– Number, what groups of people

• Information– Gender, age, relationship status, visibility of that status

• Accessible– Phone, iPod, etc.

• Access To Their Profile

Picture Coding SchemeCoding Dimension Dimension Categories

Location • Portrait (location hardly visible)

• Party (user at a party or at any other social scene)

• Area (a lot of background is visible)

Number of People

• Only the user

• The user and one other person

• Group picture (3 or more people)

•Also coded for: style, face & body visibility, type of photo, facial expression, looking at the camera

•Recorded number of previous profile pictures

(Kramer & Winter, 2008)

My P

rofile Picture

My T

win’s P

rofile Picture

Coded as:• Complete Face Visibility• Full Body Visibility• Different Style• Area• Normal Smile• Looking at Camera• One Person

Coded as:• Partial Face Visibility• Partial Body Visibility• Normal Style• Party• Making a Face• Looking at Camera• Group Picture

Coded as:• Partial Face Visibility• Partial Body Visibility• Normal Style• Party• Making a Face• Not looking at Camera• Group Picture

ResultsExtraversion

• Hypothesis 1: High scores Social Scene Photo

• Supported– Party (M=6.21, SD=1.15)

– Not Party (M=5.26, SD=1.28)

– t(52)= 2.69, p=.009

EXTRAVERTS

Extraversion is correlated with:

– Number of people in profile picture, t(51)= 1.96, p=.056

– Number of “friends,” r(161)=.32, p<.001

– Frequency of changing profile picture, r(161)=.22, p

=.005

– Frequency of updating status, r(161)= .19, p=.014

Conscientiousness• Hypothesis 2: Low scores Social Scene

Photo• Not Supported

– Party (M=6.14, SD=1.24)

– Not party (M=6.11, SD=1.13)

– t(53)=.10, p=.92

Included among Facebook Friends

Mean (SD)

Not Included among Facebook Friends

Mean (SD) p value

Family 6.43 (1.17) 6.06 (1.01) 0.16

Co-workers 6.49 (1.16) 6.24 (1.15) 0.17

Employers 6.71 (1.12) 6.30 (1.16) *0.08

Comparison of conscientiousness scores for different categories of Facebook friends

Conscientiousness is related to if you are friends with employers

*Moderately Significant, .05<p<.10

Emotional Stability• Hypothesis 3: High scores Less Frequently

Change Profile Picture• Not Supported

– r(52)= -.14, p=.34

Emotional Stabilityis related to:• Frequency of updating status, r(162)= -.19, p=.017

• Relationship status visibility when moderated by – Relationship status– Gender

– F (1,153) =20.78, p<.001, ηp2=.09

Discussion• Facebook profile information does provide

viewers with important information about the user’s personality– Personality traits: extraversion, conscientiousness,

emotional stability

– Cues: profile picture, frequency of picture changing, status updates, number of friends, types of friends, and relationship status visibility

Limitations• Small sample size

– However, makes highly significant findings more compelling

• Self-selection– Participants had to allow us to view their profile– Gender seemed to have played a role

• Whether viewers perceive these cues about the user’s personality

• Whether users are aware of the image they are portraying

– Are they intentionally displaying that personality

– Many students intentionally misrepresent themselves to gain social acceptance

(Peluchette & Karl, 2010)

• Unforeseen consequences in the future

Future Directions

Thank You

20 Honors Colloquium

Any Questions?