Identifying Social Capital in the Facebook Interface "
Christian Yoder"UNC-Chapel Hill/Sciences Po!!Fred Stutzman"UNC-Chapel Hill/Carnegie Mellon!
• Putnamʼs framework!– Bonding!– Bridging!
• Ellison et al.!– Relationship between social
capital and Facebook use!• What types of uses are
associated with acquisition of bridging social capital?!
Socio-Technical"Social Capital"
Communication Elements"
1-to-1
3rd Party Visible
Chatting Direct Messaging
Status Updates Wall Posts
3rd-Party Visible " Status Updates" Wall Posts"
A" B"
C"
Message "
Message "
1-to-1 Communication" Chatting" Direct Messaging"
A" B"
C"
Message "
Message "
Our Hypotheses"H1 "
Perceived Bridging SC "
Perceived Bridging SC"
1-1
to C
omm
."3r
d par
ty C
omm
."H3"Second relationship stronger than first!
Chat!Direct Msg.!
Status Update!Wall Posts !
H2"
Results"
Predictor Coefficient P-‐Value
Status Update -‐0.098 0.418
Wall Post 0.405 0.003**
Chat 0.094 0.259
Direct Message 0.040 0.640
Gender -‐0.189 0.005**
Live on Campus? -‐0.033 0.646
School Year -‐0.004 0.885
• Web survey, spring 2010!• List-based simple random sample, 547 respondents!• Developed measures to capture interface use!• Gender, campus residency, school year controls!• Ellison et al. perceived bridging social capital as DV!
1-to-1 "
3rd Party"
Status Updates! Wall Posts!
A" B"
C"
Message !
Message !
Why not status updates?"
Status Update!
• Less focused!• Not directed!
Notes and Discussion"• How might this look on other SNSs?!• Implications for social capital in systems!• How far can we go with self-measures? !• Bonding social capital not included!!Thanks to!• Professors Paul Jones and
Jane Brown, Honors Thesis Committee!
• UNC JOMC Knight Chair Special Gift Fund!
