Dürtüsellik ve Sosyal Tanınma ile Sosyal Medyada Siyasi İçerik Paylaşımının İlişkisi: Risk Alma ve Ortak Görüşün Aracı Rolü

Year 2021, Volume: 11 Issue: 2, 129 - 148, 15.06.2021

İsmail Yelpaze

Abstract

This paper examined what role impulsiveness and perceived social recognition played in the way young adults shared political content on social media. The study also looked into the mediating role of risk-taking and collective opinion in the relationship between these variables. The sample consisted of 554 university students (357 women and 193 men) from six faculties of Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University. Participants were recruited using convenience sampling. The study adopted a predictive correlational design. Data were collected using valid and reliable scales. The results showed that participants with high impulsiveness and perceived social recognition were more likely to share political content on social media. Risk-taking was a partial mediator between perceived social recognition and political content sharing, while it was a full mediator between impulsiveness and political sharing. Collective opinion was a partial mediator between perceived social recognition and political content sharing on social media. The results indicate that young adults with high impulsiveness are more likely to share political content on social media because they can take more risks. Moreover, young adults who care about social recognition are more likely to share political content on social media because they can take more risks and care more about collective opinion.

Keywords

Siyasi içerikli paylaşım, dürtüsellik, sosyal tanınma, ortak görüş, risk alma, sosyal medya.

Determinants of Political Content Sharing on Social Media: Impulsiveness, Social Recognition, Risk-taking, and Collective Opinion

Abstract

This paper examined what role impulsiveness and perceived social recognition played in the way young adults shared political content on social media. The study also looked into the mediating role of risk-taking and collective opinion in the relationship between these variables. The sample consisted of 554 university students (357 women and 193 men) from six faculties of Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University. Participants were recruited using convenience sampling. The study adopted a predictive correlational design. Data were collected using valid and reliable scales. The results showed that participants with high impulsiveness and perceived social recognition were more likely to share political content on social media. Risk-taking was a partial mediator between perceived social recognition and political content sharing, while it was a full mediator between impulsiveness and political sharing. Collective opinion was a partial mediator between perceived social recognition and political content sharing on social media. The results indicate that young adults with high impulsiveness are more likely to share political content on social media because they can take more risks. Moreover, young adults who care about social recognition are more likely to share political content on social media because they can take more risks and care more about collective opinion.

Keywords

Political content sharing, impulsiveness, social recognition, collective opinion, risk-taking, social media

References

• Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 50, 179-211.
• Akça, B. (2017). Determination of The Relationship Between The Science Anxiety and Science Related Intellectual Risk-Taking Behaviors of Middle School Students (Unpublished master thesis). Adnan Menderes Universtiy, Institute of Science, Aydın/Turkey.
• Antczak, S. (2016). When your friends don’t share your politics. https://www.forbes.com/sites/nextavenue/2016/02/16/when-your-friendsdont-share-your-politics/#6bc583ba5c32, Accessed 08/03/2019.
• Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.
• Bock, G.W. & Kim, Y.G. (2002). Breaking the myths of rewards: an exploratory study of attitudes about knowledge sharing. Information Resources Management Journal, 14-21.
• Bollen, K. A. (1989). A new incremental fit index for general structural equation models. Sociological Methods & Research, 17(3), 303–316. doi: 10.1177/0049124189017003004
• Browne, M.W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing Structural Equation Models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Bhutia, J. (2015). Man faces 32-year jail term for Facebook ‘like’ of doctored photo of king. http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ thailand-man-faces-32-year-jail-term-facebook-like-doctored-photo-king-1532851. Accessed 01/02/2021
• Byrnes, J. P., Miller D. C., & Schafer, W. D. (1999). Gender differences in risk taking: A Meta-Analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 367-383.
• Ceyhan, A. A., & Yelpaze, İ. (2017). Young Adults‘ Facebook Use Behaviors and Perceived Communication Skills. The Journal of Buca Faculty of Education, 44, 152-168.
• Chaffey, D. (2019). Global social media research summary 2019. https://www.smartinsights.com/social-media-marketing/social-media-strategy/new-global-social-media-research/ Accessed 08/03/2019.
• Digital (2019): Global digital overview. https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2019-global-digital-overview. Accessed 08/02/2019.
• Duggan, M. & Smith, A. (2016). The political environment on social media. Pew Research Centre.
• Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., Jeyaraj, A., Clement,M., & Williams,M. D. (2017). Re-examining the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): Towards a revised theoretical model. Information Systems
• Frontiers, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-017-9774-y.
• Fogel, J., & Nehmad, E. (2009). Internet social network communities: Risk taking, trust, and privacy concerns. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(1), 153-160.
• Gençtanırım, D. (2014). University form of Risk Behaviors Scale: Validity and reliability studies. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 5(1), 24-34.
• Grimmelmann, J. T. (2009). Facebook and the social dynamics of privacy. Iowa Law Review, 95(4), 1-52.
• Grunbaum, J. A., Kann, L., Kinchen, S., Ross, J., Hawkins, J., Lowry, R., …. & Collins, J. (2004). Youth risk behavior surveillance--United States, 2003. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. Surveillance Summaries (Washington, DC: 2002), 53(2), 1-96.
• Gullone, E., & Moore, S. (1996). Predicting adolescent risk behavior using a personalized cost- benefit analysis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 25(3).
• Hars, A., & Ou, S. (2002). Working for free? Motivations for participating in open-source projects. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6(3), 25-39.
• Hollander, E., & Evers, M. (2001). New developments in impulsivity. The Lancet, 358(9286), 949-950.
• Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60.
• Hossain, M. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., Chan, C., Standing, C., & Olanrewaju, A. S. (2018). Sharing political content in online social media: A planned and unplanned behaviour approach. Information Systems Frontiers, 20(3), 485-501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-017-9820-9
• Jernigan, C., & Mistree, B. (2009). Gaydar: Facebook friendships expose sexual orientation. First Monday, 14(10).
• Kacen, J. J., Hess, J. D., &Walker, D. (2012). Spontaneous selection: The influence of product and merchandising factors on consumer impulse purchases. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 19, 578 588.
• Kapoor, K. K., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2015). Metamorphosis of Indian electoral campaigns: Modi’s social media experiment. International Journal of Indian Culture and Business Management, 11(4), 496-516. https:// doi.org/10.1504/ijicbm.2015.072430.
• Kıran Esen, B. (2002). Investigation of risk taking behaviour, smoking and achievement of students of various levels of peer pressure (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Gazi University, Ankara.
• Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford publications.
• Lahno, A. M., & Serra-Garcia, M. (2015). Peer effects in risk taking: Envy or conformity?. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 50(1), 73-95.
• Lapsley, D. K., Milstead, M., Quintana, S. M., Flannery, D., & Buss, R. R. (1986). Adolescent egocentrism and formal operations: Tests of a theoretical assumption. Developmental Psychology, 22(6), 800.
• Li, H., & Sakamoto, Y. (2014). Social impacts in social media: An examination of perceived truthfulness and sharing of information. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 278-287.
• Ma, W. W. K., & Chan, A. (2014). Knowledge sharing and social media: Altruism, perceived online attachment motivation, and perceived online relationship commitment. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 51-58. Nasser-Abu Alhija, F., & Wisenbaker, J. (2006). A Monte Carlo study investigating the impact of item parceling strategies on parameter estimates and their standard errors in CFA. Structural Equation Modeling, 13(2), 204-228.
• Olsen, S. O., Tudoran, A. A., Honkanen, P., & Verplanken, B. (2016). Differences and similarities between impulse buying and variety seeking: A personality-based perspective. Psychology & Marketing, 33(1), 36–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20853.
• Orr, A. (2012). Facebook post could send Perth student to Bangladesh jail. http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/ facebook-post-could-sendperth-student-to-bangladesh-jail-20120115-1q119.html. Accessed 02/07 2019.
• Osatuyi, B. (2013). Information sharing on social media sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2622-2631.
• Osborne, J. W. (2013). Best practices in data cleaning. California: Sage Publication, Inc.
• Palfrey, J. (2008). Enhancing child safety and online technologies: In Internet safety task force. http://cyber.law. harvard.edu/pubrelease/isttf/ Accessed at 10.01.09
• Park, J. H., Gu, B., Leung, A. C. M., & Konana, P. (2014). An investigation of information sharing and seeking behaviors in online investment communities. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 1–12. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.002.
• Park, S. C., Keil, M., Bock, G.W., & Kim, J. U. (2016).Winner’s regret in online C2C auctions: An automatic thinking perspective. Information Systems Journal, 26(6), 613–640. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12075.
• Peterson, F. L., Walker, L., Whatt, T. J., Rheinboldt, K., White, C., & Hogkinson, M. (2003). Evidence-based sexuality education. American Public Health Association Annual Conference San Francisco, California, November 18.
• Romer, D. (2010). Adolescent risk taking, impulsivity, and brain development: Implications for prevention. Developmental Psychobiology: The Journal of the International Society for Developmental Psychobiology, 52(3), 263-276.
• Sakamoto, Y., Ma, J., & Nickerson, J. V. (2009). 2377 people like this article: The influence of others’ decisions on yours. In: Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.
• Schreiber, J. B., Nora, A., Stage, F. K., Barlow, E. A., & King, J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(6), 323–338. doi: 10.3200/JOER.99.6.323-338.
• Shiau, W.L., & Chau, P. Y. K. (2015). Does altruism matter on online group buying? Perspectives from egotistic and altruistic motivation. Information Technology & People, 28(3), 677–698. https://doi.org/10.1108/ ITP-08-2014-0174.
• Stutzman, F. (2006). An evaluation of identity-sharing behavior in social network communities. iDMAa Journal, 3(1), 1-7
• Stutzman, F., Capra, R., & Thompson, J. (2011). Factors mediating disclosure in social network sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 590-598.
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. van Duijvenvoorde, A. C., Blankenstein, N. E., Crone, E. A., & Figner, B. (2017). Towards a better understanding of adolescent risk taking: Contextual moderators and model-based analysis. Individual differences in judgment and decision making from a developmental perspective, 8-27.
• Yakar, L. (2020). Korelasyon. In F. Orçan (Ed.)., Sosyal Bilimlerde İstatistik, Excel ve SPSS Uygulamaları (93-138). Ankara: Anı Publication.
• Willoughby, T., Good, M., Adachi, P. J. C., Hamza, C., & Tavernier, R. (2013). Examining the link between adolescent brain development and risk taking from a social–developmental perspective. Brain and Cognition, 83, 315-324. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2013.09.008.