Big 5 and Narcisissm
Big 5 and Narcisissm
Big 5 and Narcisissm
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/220495577
CITATIONS
144
2 AUTHORS:
Tracii Ryan
Sophia Xenos
RMIT University
RMIT University
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE
Who uses Facebook? An investigation into the relationship between the Big Five,
shyness, narcissism, loneliness, and Facebook usage
Tracii Ryan, Sophia Xenos
RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Available online 8 March 2011
Keywords:
Facebook
Big Five
Personality
Narcissism
Shyness
Loneliness
a b s t r a c t
The unprecedented popularity of the social networking site Facebook raises a number of important questions regarding the impact it has on sociality. However, as Facebook is a very recent social phenomenon,
there is a distinct lack of psychological theory relating to its use. While research has begun to identify the
types of people who use Facebook, this line of investigation has been limited to student populations. The
current study aimed to investigate how personality inuences usage or non-usage of Facebook. The sample consisted of 1324 self-selected Australian Internet users (1158 Facebook users and 166 Facebook nonusers), between the ages of 18 and 44. Participants were required to complete an online questionnaire
package comprising the Big Five Inventory (BFI), the Narcissistic Personality Inventory 29-item version
(NPI-29), the Revised Cheek and Buss Shyness Scale (RCBS), and the Social and Emotional Loneliness Scale
for Adults Short version (SELSA-S). Facebook users also completed a Facebook usage questionnaire. The
results showed that Facebook users tend to be more extraverted and narcissistic, but less conscientious
and socially lonely, than nonusers. Furthermore, frequency of Facebook use and preferences for specic
features were also shown to vary as a result of certain characteristics, such as neuroticism, loneliness,
shyness and narcissism. It is hoped that research in this area continues, and leads to the development
of theory regarding the implications and gratications of Facebook use.
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The popularity of the social networking site Facebook is unprecedented: It is currently the second most frequently visited website
on the Internet (Alexa Internet Inc., 2011) and attracts a global
audience of over 606 million people (Gonzalez, 2011). Enthusiasm
for Facebook is particularly apparent in Australia, as close to half of
the population are reported to be active users (Gonzalez, 2011). In
light of gures such as these, it is not surprising that Facebook has
been found to impact on the sociality of its users. For instance, a
number of studies have found that Facebook use is associated with
gains in social capital (Burke, Marlow, & Lento, 2010; Ellison,
Steineld, & Lampe, 2007; Steineld, Ellison, & Lampe, 2008). Furthermore, a recent qualitative study suggests that Facebook may
be changing the way individuals communicate and associate with
one another (Richardson & Hessey, 2009).
Despite the potential implications of Facebook use, there is a
distinct lack of empirically derived theory in this area. This may
be because Facebook is a relatively recent social phenomenon,
and as such, there has been limited opportunity for exploratory research. However, in the last two years, a growing number of
Corresponding author. Tel.: +61 3 9925 1081; fax: +61 3 9925 3587.
E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Xenos).
0747-5632/$ - see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.02.004
Hamburger & Ben-Artzi, 2000; Thayer & Ray, 2006; Tosun &
Lajunen, 2010).
Rather than looking at the relationship between Internet use and
specic traits, the majority of research in this area has been based on
broad models of personality. The Five-Factor Model, otherwise
known as the Big Five (Goldberg, 1990), is arguably the most commonly used model for this purpose (Ehrenberg, Juckes, White, &
Walsh, 2008; Landers & Lounsbury, 2006; Swickert, Hittner, Harris,
& Herring, 2002; Tuten & Bosnjak, 2001). The Big Five is based on the
theory that an individuals personality can be evaluated by determining how they rank on ve bipolar factors: extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness to
experience (McCrae & John, 1992). Within each of these ve broad
factors, a range of more specic personality traits are represented.
For example, individuals high in openness to experience tend to
be creative, original, and curious, while individuals low in this factor
tend to be down to earth, conventional, and have a narrow range of
interests (Costa & McCrae, 1992). The importance of each of the Big
Five personality factors has been independently validated by a number of researchers, and empirical testing across various methods and
cultures has shown this model to be widely replicable (for a detailed
review see McCrae and John, 1992).
Several of the Big Five personality factors are believed to be associated with the way individuals interact with and maintain their social relationships. For example, extraversion is positively correlated
with both the size of social networks, and the amount of social interaction that an individual engages in Aspendorpf and Wilpers (1998).
Due to its relevance to social behaviour, the Big Five factors have
recently been employed to investigate the use of certain forms of
online social media, such as social networking sites (AmichaiHamburger & Vinitzky, 2010; Correa, Hinsley, & de Ziga, 2010;
Ross et al., 2009) and blogs (Guadagno, Okdie, & Eno, 2008).
1.2. The Big Five and Facebook
Ross et al. (2009) and Amichai-Hamburger and Vinitzky (2010)
looked specically at the relationship between the Big Five factors
and usage of Facebook. Their results showed that a number of
these factors are associated with particular patterns of Facebook
use. For example, extraverted individuals generally have more
Facebook Friends (Amichai-Hamburger & Vinitzky, 2010), and belong to more Facebook Groups1 (Ross et al., 2009), than introverted
individuals. Furthermore, individuals who are high in neuroticism
are more likely than emotionally stable individuals to prefer using
the Wall2 (Ross et al., 2009). As Ross et al. (2009) explain, a possible
reason for the latter result is that the Wall offers people with neurotic tendencies the opportunity to take their time formulating
messages and responses. As a consequence, the potential for unintentionally revealing personal information to others is reduced.
Despite the prediction that extraverted people would engage in
more frequent use of Facebook, while conscientious people would
engage in less, neither Ross et al. (2009) nor Amichai-Hamburger
and Vinitzky (2010) found any signicant relationships between
the Big Five factors and intensity of Facebook use. In response to
this, Ross et al. (2009) argued that, as a measure of personality,
the Big Five might be too broad to reect the nuances associated
with Facebook usage. They suggested that future Facebook-related
research should include a number of narrow personality traits,
such as shyness and narcissism. Some researchers have begun to
examine the relationships between these traits and Facebook
Facebook Groups are generally based around popular interests and activities.
Users can join existing Groups or create their own.
2
Each Facebook user has a Wall that their friends can use to write messages or post
links for the user to see. Communication on the Wall is asynchronous, and the posted
information is generally viewable to other Facebook users.
1659
use: Buffardi and Campbell (2008) and Mehdizadeh (2010) investigated Facebook use among narcissistic individuals, while Sheldon
(2008) and Orr et al. (2009) focused on the association between
Facebook use and shyness.
1.3. Shyness, narcissism, and Facebook
The results of the studies by Buffardi & Campbell (2008) and
Mehdizadeh (2010) indicate that people with high levels of narcissism engage in frequent use of Facebook. According to those
researchers, this trend is attributable to the fact that Facebook
encourages users to engage in self-promoting and supercial behaviours, such as posting photos and writing status updates (Buffardi &
Campbell, 2008; Mehdizadeh, 2010). As Buffardi and Campbell
(2008) point out, the prevalence of narcissistic individuals on Facebook may lead to a rise in narcissistic behaviour among users in general, as such behaviour may begin to be viewed as acceptable.
Therefore, this is an area worthy of further investigation.
In regards to shyness, the results of the study by Orr et al.
(2009) demonstrated that shy people spend signicantly more
time using Facebook than non-shy people. Similarly, Sheldon
(2008) found that people who are socially anxious like to use Facebook to combat loneliness. These outcomes may stem from the fact
that shy and socially anxious people tend to feel more comfortable
maintaining social relationships in online settings than they do in
face-to-face interactions (Ebeling-Witte, Frank, & Lester, 2007). If
this is the case, Facebook use may lead to benecial outcomes for
these particular people, such as increased social capital (Steineld
et al., 2008). However, as neither Sheldon (2008) nor Orr et al.
(2009) examined exactly how shy and socially anxious people
were spending their time on Facebook, this conclusion may be
erroneous. Shy people may instead be spending large amounts of
their time engaging in non-social behaviour on Facebook, such as
playing games. Again, this is an area that warrants further
investigation.
1.4. Rationale for the current study
The research discussed so far suggests that the specic gratications of Facebook users may differ as a function of their individual
personality characteristics. Such ndings represent an important
rst step for the foundation of Facebook-related theory. However,
as the results of these studies have been based on data derived
exclusively from university students, generalisability to the typical
Facebook user is limited. It is therefore essential that these studies
are replicated in wider populations, preferably in samples recruited from the Internet. Furthermore, in order to obtain a more
accurate representation of the types of people that Facebook appeals to, it is recommended that researchers compare the personality characteristics of Facebook users with those of nonusers. In
response to these issues, the current study was designed to investigate the relationship between personality and Facebook usage in
a large population of Australian Internet users. In keeping with
previous research, this study focused on the narrow traits of shyness and narcissism, as well as the Big Five personality factors. In
addition, the emotional state of loneliness was included, as engaging in social behaviour on the Internet has previously been found
to reduce levels of loneliness (Shaw & Gant, 2002).
1.5. Aims and hypotheses
The specic aims of the current study were twofold: to explore
the possibility that people with certain characteristics were more
likely to be Facebook users, and to ascertain whether these characteristics were related to differential usage of the site. It was
hypothesised that individuals with higher scores on extraversion
1660
1661
Table 1
Means (and standard deviations) of personality characteristics among Facebook users
and nonusers.
Characteristic
For the purpose of analysis, data from Facebook users and nonusers were split into two groups. Wherever necessary, items were
reverse scored and total and subscale scores were calculated. In order to deal with missing data, the mean score for each item was
calculated and substituted for the missing value. Normality was
tested for each of the personality measures by assessing stemand-leaf plots and histograms. As the sample was large, skewness
and kurtosis statistics were not calculated (Field, 2005). An alpha
coefcient of .05 was used for all statistical tests.
3.1. Differences between Facebook users and nonusers
The mean scores of Facebook users and nonusers for each of the
personality characteristics are presented in Table 1. In order to
investigate whether people with certain types of characteristics
were more likely to be Facebook users or nonusers, a series of sin-
Facebook users
(n = 1158)
Facebook nonusers
(n = 166)
Big Five
Extraversion
Agreeableness
Conscientiousness
Neuroticism
Openness
3.09
3.56
3.36
3.04
3.56
2.80
3.51
3.47
3.04
3.47
Shyness
Total
2.82 (.73)
2.94 (.74)
Loneliness
Total
Romantic
Family
Social
3.07
4.50
4.43
2.80
3.16
4.41
4.32
3.18
Narcissism
Total
Exhibitionism
Leadership
10.28 (5.07)
1.80 (1.69)
3.63 (2.16)
(.76)
(.55)
(.55)
(.76)
(.58)
(.94)
(.93)
(.59)
(1.24)
(.73)
(.55)
(.64)
(.72)
(.57)
(.98)
(.87)
(.59)
(1.35)
8.85 (4.20)
1.28 (1.35)
3.23 (1.94)
1662
r(1158) = .15, p < .001. There was also a signicant negative correlation between time spent on Facebook per day and conscientiousness, r(1158) = .14, p < .001. There was no signicant relationship
between time spent on Facebook per day and shyness, r(1158) =
.04, p = .15, or any of the sub-factors of loneliness romantic,
r(1158) = .01, p = .60, family, r(1158) = .01, p = .64, and social,
r(1158) = .04, p = .19.
3.3. Preference for Facebook features
The most preferred Facebook features were Photos (M = 3.70,
SD = 1.57), Messages (M = 3.57, SD = 1.49), the Wall (M = 3.53,
SD = 1.50), and Status Updates (M = 3.51, SD = 1.55). Games
(M = 2.52, SD = 1.52), Notes (M = 2.73, SD = 1.21), and Events
(M = 3.18, SD = 1.47) were least preferred. Both the Wall (28.9%,
N = 335) and Messages (23.2%, N = 269) appear to be the most preferred means of communication on Facebook.
The covariance between preferences for the communicative features of Facebook and the personality variables of extraversion and
neuroticism were calculated using Pearsons correlation coefcient
(two-tailed). Extraversion was signicantly positively correlated
with preferences for all of the communicative features of Facebook: Chat, r(1158) = .09, p = .003, Messages, r(1158) = .15,
p < .001, Comments, r(1158) = .09, p < .001, and the Wall, r(1158) =
.13, p < .001. On the other hand, the associations between neuroticism and the communicative features of Facebook were varied.
There was a signicant correlation between neuroticism and preference for the Wall, r(1158) = .09, p = .003, but not for Messages,
r(1158) = .05, p = .08, Comments, r(1158) = .05, p = .08, or Chat,
r = -.03, p = .24.
Pearsons correlation coefcients (two-tailed) were also calculated to investigate the relationship between preferences for Photos and Status Updates and narcissism. There were signicant
positive correlations between preference for Photos and narcissism, r(1158) = .10, p = .001, as well as the sub-factor of exhibitionism, r(1158) = .14, p < .001. There was no signicant correlation
between preference for Photos and leadership, r(1158) = .04,
p = .14. There was also a signicant positive correlation between
preference for the Status Update feature and exhibitionism,
r(1158) = .06, p = .039, however this relationship was not signicant for total narcissism, r(1158) = .03, p = .26, or leadership,
r(1158) = .03, p = .92.
3.4. Factor analysis
A principal component factor analysis with Varimax rotation revealed that preferences for Facebook features load into four factors: Active Social Contributions, Passive Engagement, News and
Information, and Real-Time Social Interaction. Factor pattern coefcients for the four factors are presented in Table 2. The covariance
between each personality variable and preferences for Facebook
features (by factor) were calculated using Pearsons correlation
coefcient (two-tailed). The results are presented in Table 3, and
signicant correlations are indicated.
4. Discussion
The current study aims to identify the personality characteristics associated with being a Facebook user or nonuser, and to
examine whether these characteristics are related to the way people use the site. The results show that Facebook users are more
likely to be extraverted and narcissistic, but they also have stronger feelings of family loneliness. On the other hand, Facebook nonusers are more likely to be conscientious, shy, and socially lonely.
Furthermore, with the exception of romantic loneliness, all of the
Table 2
Factor loadings for exploratory factor analysis with varimax rotation of preferences
for Facebook features.
Feature
ASC
PE
NI
RTSI
Status
Wall
Comments
News feed
Like
Messages
Photos
Groups
Games
Fan pages
Events
Notes
Chat
.81
.77
.76
.68
.67
.61
.60
.18
.05
.20
.15
.07
.08
.09
.09
.23
.17
.33
.00
.17
.71
.70
.69
.11
.14
.14
.08
.12
.07
.03
.07
.13
.37
.25
.08
.25
.75
.72
.06
.07
.09
.06
.03
.09
.41
.09
.16
.03
.10
.03
.05
.93
Note: Factor loadings >.60 are in boldface. ASC = Active Social Contributions;
PE = Passive Engagement; NI = News and Information; RTSI = Real-Time Social
Interaction.
Table 3
Correlations between personality characteristics and factors of Facebook feature
preference.
Characteristics
PE
NI
RTSI
.14***
.06*
.03
.08**
.05
.12***
.02
.05
.10***
.01
.01
.06*
.08**
.04
.11***
.11***
.05
.05
.05
.02
.05
.11***
.04
Loneliness
Total
Romantic
Family
Social
.09**
.04
.04
.10**
.10***
.06
.01
.09**
.01
.01
.08**
.09**
.02
.03
.08**
.04
Narcissism
Total
Exhibitionism
Leadership
.06*
.09**
.01
.06
.12***
.04
.04
.06*
.04
.10**
.04
.08**
.08**
In regards to the predictions made about Facebook use and narcissism, both hypotheses are supported. Firstly, Facebook users
have higher levels of total narcissism, exhibitionism, and leadership than Facebook nonusers. Secondly, individuals with higher
scores on exhibitionism also have higher preferences for Photos
and Status Updates. These ndings validate previous research by
Buffardi and Campbell (2008) and Mehdizadeh (2010), and substantiate the proposition that Facebook is particularly appealing
for narcissistic and exhibitionistic people. In fact, it could be argued
that Facebook specically graties the narcissistic individuals
need to engage in self-promoting and supercial behaviour.
The prediction that Facebook nonusers would have greater levels
of loneliness than users has also been conrmed, although only for
the sub-factor of social loneliness. Although there has been no previous research in this area, the obtained results are plausible because people with smaller social networks would generally be less
motivated to use a website such as Facebook. However, as Correa
et al. (2010) point out, the Internet is an increasingly user-generated
environment, and individuals who choose not to engage may be
limiting their ability to advance socially. Clearly, this is an area
where further research is justied, as the results also show that
Facebook users have signicantly higher levels of family loneliness
than nonusers. Furthermore, the nding that lonely people tend to
spend more time on Facebook per day, and have higher preferences
for the passive features of Facebook, is particularly concerning.
In regards to specic patterns of Facebook use, the rst hypothesis states that shy people will spend more time on Facebook than
non-shy people. However, the results show no signicant relationship between shyness and frequency of Facebook use. These ndings contradict those reported by Orr et al. (2009), and further
suggest that results obtained from student populations are not always representative of typical Facebook users. In terms of Facebook usage habits, people with higher levels of neuroticism are
more likely to prefer using the Wall. This result supports the
hypothesis made in the current study, and provides additional evidence that neurotic people tend to prefer asynchronous forms of
online communication (Ross et al., 2009). It also accounts for the
fact that previous researchers have reported a negative relationship between neuroticism and use of instant messaging clients
(Amiel and Sargent, 2004; Swickert et al., 2002).
4.1. Limitations and future research
Two major limitations associated with the current study need
to be addressed. Firstly, the incentive of receiving feedback on
the BFI personality measure may have motivated people who did
not t the inclusion criteria to lie in order to participate. In order
to avoid this problem, researchers employing a similar methodology are advised to allow individuals from a wide range of ages
and nationalities to participate. Responses from participants outside the desired ranges can then be removed at the data analysis
stage, thus limiting the need for participants to lie. Secondly, the
methods of recruitment employed in this study may have led to
sample bias. In particular, the sample may have contained a higher
than normal proportion of heavy Internet users. Furthermore, because the participants were recruited from Facebook and Internet
discussion forums, the sample may have also been biased towards
people who enjoy engaging in social interaction on the Internet.
Researchers wishing to undertake further investigation in this area
would do well to recruit participants on other types of websites, as
well as using traditional ofine methods of recruitment.
5. Conclusion
It is hoped that the results within this paper will serve as a
foundation for the development of much needed psychological
1663
theory relating to the use of Facebook. While a few signicant differences have been found between Facebook users and nonusers,
for the most part the results of the current study suggests that
Facebook appeals to individuals with a variety of characteristics.
The data relating to more specic Facebook usage conrms this:
Facebook graties its users in different ways depending on their
individual characteristics. Unfortunately, an in-depth discussion
of the specic results underlying this argument is beyond the
scope of the current study. However, one of the most noteworthy
ndings was the tendency for neurotic and lonely individuals to
spend greater amounts of time on Facebook per day than nonlonely individuals. For lonely people in particular, it appears that
they are mainly using Facebook to partake in passive activities, instead of providing active social contributions. Such ndings suggest that not all Facebook users are using the site to improve
their social capital, unlike other research had implied (Burke
et al., 2010; Ellison et al., 2007; Steineld et al., 2008). However,
due to the small effect sizes reported in the current study, these
arguments require further validation. It is therefore recommended
that researchers continue to examine the relationship between
individual characteristics and specic patterns of Facebook usage,
particularly in samples that are representative of typical Facebook
users.
References
Alexa Internet Inc. (2011). Alexa top 500 global sites. <http://www.alexa.com/
topsites> Accessed 03.02.11.
Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2002). Internet and personality. Computers in Human
Behavior, 18, 110. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(01)00034-6.
Amichai-Hamburger, Y., & Vinitzky, G. (2010). Social network use and personality.
Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 12891295. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.018.
Amichai-Hamburger, Y., Wainapel, G., & Fox, S. (2002). On the Internet no one
knows Im an introvert: Extroversion, neuroticism, and Internet interaction.
CyberPsychology and Behavior, 5, 125128. doi:10.1089/109493102753770507.
Amiel, T., & Sargent, S. L. (2004). Individual differences in Internet usage motives.
Computers in Human Behavior, 20, 711726. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.09.002.
Aspendorpf, J. B., & Wilpers, S. (1998). Personality effects on social relationships.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 15311544. doi:10.1037/00223514.74.6.1531.
Birnie, S. A., & Horvath, P. (2002). Psychological predictors of Internet social
communication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 7, 1327.
doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2002.tb00154.x.
Buffardi, L. E., & Campbell, W. K. (2008). Narcissism and social networking Web
sites. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 13031314. doi:10.1177/
0146167208320061.
Burke, M., Marlow, C., & Lento, T. (2010, April). Social network activity and social
well-being. Paper presented at the conference on human factors in computing
systems, Atlanta. <http://www.thoughtcrumbs.com/publications/burke_chi2010_
sns_and_wellbeing.pdf>.
Cervone, D., & Pervin, L. A. (2008). Personality: Theory and research (10th ed.).
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Cheek, J. M. (1983). The Revised Cheek and Buss Shyness scale. Unpublished
manuscript. Massachusetts, United States of America: Wellesley College,
Wellesley.
Correa, T., Hinsley, A. W., & de Ziga, H. G. (2010). Who interacts on the Web? The
intersection of users personality and social media use. Computers in Human
Behavior, 26, 247253. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.09.003.
Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO-PI-R: Professional manual. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
Cramer, K. M., & Barry, J. E. (1999). Conceptualizations and measures of loneliness:
A comparison of subscales. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 491502.
doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00257-8.
DiTommaso, E., Brannen, C., & Best, L. A. (2004). Measurement and validity
characteristics of the short version of the Social and Emotional Loneliness Scale
for Adults. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 99119. doi:10.1177/
0013164403258450.
Ebeling-Witte, S., Frank, M. L., & Lester, D. (2007). Shyness, Internet use, and
personality. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 10, 713716. doi:10.1089/
cpb.2007.9964.
Ehrenberg, A., Juckes, S., White, K. M., & Walsh, S. P. (2008). Personality and selfesteem as predictors of young peoples technology use. CyberPsychology and
Behavior, 11, 739741. doi:10.1089/cpb.2008.0030.
Ellison, N. B., Steineld, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benets of Facebook friends:
Social capital and college students use of online social network sites. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 11431168. doi:10.1111/j.10836101.2007.00367.x.
1664
Engelberg, E., & Sjberg, L. (2004). Internet use, social skills, and adjustment.
CyberPsychology and Behavior, 7, 4147. doi:10.1089/109493104322820101.
Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage.
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative description of personality: The Big-Five
factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 12161229.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1216.
Gonzalez, N. (2011). Facebook marketing statistics, demographics, reports and news.
<http://www.checkfacebook.com> Accessed 03.02.11.
Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the BigFive personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504528.
doi:10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1.
Guadagno, R. E., Okdie, B. M., & Eno, C. A. (2008). Who blogs? Personality predictors
of blogging. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 19932004. doi:10.1016/
j.chb.2007.09.001.
Hamburger, Y. A., & Ben-Artzi, E. (2000). The relationship between extraversion and
neuroticism and the different uses of the Internet. Computers in Human
Behavior, 16, 441449. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(00)00017-0.
Hargittai, E. (2008). Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social
network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 276297.
doi:10.1111/i.1083-6101.2007.00396.x.
Hopko, D. R., Stowell, J., Jones, W. H., Armento, M. E. A., & Cheek, J. M. (2005).
Psychometric properties of the Revised Cheek and Buss Shyness scale. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 84, 185192. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8402_08.
John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991). The Big Five inventory-versions 4a
and 54. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality
and Social Research.
Kansi, J. (2003). The Narcissistic personality inventory: Applicability in a Swedish
population sample. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 44, 441448.
doi:10.1046/j.1467-9450.2003.00365.x.
Kraaykamp, G., & van Eijck, K. (2005). Personality, media preferences, and cultural
participation. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 16751688. doi:10.1016/
j.paid.2004.11.002.
Landers, R. N., & Lounsbury, J. W. (2006). An investigation of Big Five and narrow
personality traits in relation to Internet usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 22,
283293. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.06.001.
McConochie, W. A. (2007). The Big Five Inventory (BFI) manual. <http://
www.testmasterinc.com/tests/b/> Accessed 05.08.10.
McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the Five-Factor model and its
applications (special edition). Journal of Personality, 60, 175215. doi:10.1111/
j.1467-6494.1992.tb00970.x.
Mehdizadeh, S. (2010). Self-presentation 2.0: Narcissism and self-esteem on
Facebook. CyberPsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13, 357364.
doi:10.1089/cyber.2009.0257.
Orr, E. S., Sisic, M., Ross, C., Simmering, M. G., Arseneault, J. M., & Orr, R. R. (2009).
The inuence of shyness on the use of Facebook in an undergraduate sample.
CyberPsychology and Behavior, 12, 337340. doi:10.1089/cpb.2008.0214.
Raacke, J., & Bonds-Raacke, J. (2008). MySpace and Facebook: Applying the uses and
gratications theory to exploring friend-networking sites. CyberPsychology and
Behaviour, 11, 169174. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0056.
Richardson, K., & Hessey, S. (2009). Archiving the self? Facebook as biography of
social and relational memory. Journal of Information, Communication, and Ethics
in Society, 7, 2538. doi:10.1108/14779960910938070.
Rosengren, K. (1974). Uses and gratications: A paradigm outlined. In J. Blumler & E.
Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives (pp. 269286).
Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.
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, 578586. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.024.
Shaw, L. H., & Gant, L. M. (2002). In defence of the Internet: The relationship
between Internet communication and depression, loneliness, self-esteem, and
perceived social support. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 5, 157171.
doi:10.1089/109493102753770552.
Sheldon, P. (2008). The relationship between unwillingness-to-communicate and
students Facebook use. Journal of Media Psychology, 20, 6775. doi:10.1027/
18641105.20.2.67.
Sheldon, P. (2009). Maintain or develop new relationships? Gender differences in
Facebook use. Rocky Mountain Communication Review, 6, 5156. <https://www.
humis.utah.edu/humis/docs/organization_951_1251746183.pdf#page=51>.
Srivastava, S., John, O. P., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2003). Development of
personality in early and middle adulthood: Set like plaster or persistent
change? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 10411053.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.5.1041.
Steineld, C., Ellison, N. B., & Lampe, C. (2008). Social capital, self-esteem, and use of
online social network sites: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied
Developmental Psychology, 29, 434445. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2008.07.002.
Svindseth, M. F., Sreb, ., Nttestad, J. A., Roaldset, J. O., Wallin, J., & Dahl, A. A.
(2009). Psychometric examination and normative data for the Narcissistic
Personality Inventory 29 item version. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 50,
151159. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2008.00686.x.
Swickert, R. J., Hittner, J. B., Harris, J. L., & Herring, J. A. (2002). Relationships among
Internet use, personality, and social support. Computers in Human Behavior, 18,
437451. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(01)00054-1.
Thayer, S. E., & Ray, S. (2006). Online communication preferences across age, gender,
and duration of Internet use. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 9, 432440.
doi:10.1089/cpb.2006.9.432.
Tosun, L. P., & Lajunen, T. (2010). Does Internet use reect your personality?
Relationship between Eysenks personality dimensions and Internet use.
Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 162167. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.010.
Tufekci, Z. (2008). Grooming, gossip, Facebook and Myspace. Information,
Communication, and Society, 11, 544564. doi:10.1080/13691180801999050.
Tuten, T. L., & Bosnjak, M. (2001). Understanding differences in Web usage: The role
of need for cognition and the Five Factor model of personality. Social Behaviour
and Personality, 29, 391398. doi:10.2224/sbp. 2001.29.4.391.
Weaver, J. B. (1991). Exploring the links between personality and media
preferences. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 12931299.
doi:10.1016/0191-8869(91) 90203-N.