به نام خدا

Relational Dialectics in Facebook Relational Dialectics in Facebook.com among Malaysian UPM Undergraduate Students Ashraf Ahadzadeh April 2012

Introduction Participation in social network sites (SNSs) has grown rapidly in recent years and is a highly popular, global phenomenon.

They are playing a prominent role in everyday social interactions, formation and maintenance of our relationship in the digital world.

Insight into CMC To allow individuals to present themselves, To articulate their social networks, To establish connections with others, To altered the nature of relations, To change the direction of the relational flow interactions. Insight into CMC

Con’t TRADITIONAL THEORIES CMC THEORIES Social Information Processing (SIP) model, Hyperpersonal Perspective Social Identity-Deindividuation Effects (SIDE) theory Social Presence Theory Social Capital Approach Social Penetration theory Uncertainty Reduction Theory Social Exchange Theory

Facebook at the peak

Now in its peak, Facebook is the first most trafficked website on the internet; two-thirds of all Facebook users log onto the website at least once a day and those visits usually last at least twenty minutes. (http://smsu.Facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics).

Users ranging from small children to grandparents,  45% of Malaysian Facebook users are male, 51% female and 4% unstated, In terms of age groups, young adults are the main contributors as expected. Regional wise, Malaysia has the most Facebook users in Southeast Asia.

Con’t Plenty of qualitative and quantitative studies have been carried out to examine the different facets of Facebook. How and why do users apply facebook? How do users start and end relationships? Why facebook negatively and positively affect our lives? What are the differences between users and non-users? Why are young adults addicted to facebook? Is facebook substituted with FtF?

Con’t How Are Relationships Maintained in Facebook.com??? Relational Dialectics Theory

Ideal Relationships versus Relational Dialectics Relationships are not developed in a patterned and often linear way Intimacy Certainty Satisfaction Disclosure Similarity Intimacy

Con’t Dialectical Approach both individuals and relationships are created and recreated through interaction – that is, interaction does not function to reveal a performed-self like self- disclosure. Ideal Relationships Relationship is the container in which communication flows in the form of self-disclosure, information seeking

Con’t Developed by Baxter and Montgomery. Tension, struggle, and general messiness of close personal ties” (Baxter and Montgomery, 2006). How relationships are sustained through “inextricably intertwined” social, historical, and environmental forces.

Con’t It focuses on the contradictory tensions that occur between two interdependent, yet mutually exclusive poles. These “paired opposites” exist on a continuum and operate together to continually negotiate the relationship in order to maintain it (Baxter, 1993).

All Relationships suffer from Tensions. Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2005

Are Tensions Repaired??? They Are Managed.

Three sorts of Dialectics Con’t Three sorts of Dialectics Openness Closedness Connection Autonomy Certainty Uncertainty

Strategies to deal with tensions Selection Separation Integration And several other strategies

Research Questions 1. What sorts of relational dialectics do Facebook users experience? 2. Which strategies do Facebook users employ to manage these dialectics?

Research Design Qualitative approach The criteria for the present inquiry (1) UPM undergraduate students who are studying communication; (2) those students who are active member of Facebook; (3) for at least one year. Data were collected by interview. Data were recoded. sorted, coded and recoded to identify emerging themes and making theoretical connections among coded data to review initial and subsequent analyses to search for alternative explanations to confirming/ disconfirming evidence.

Data Alnaysis Connection versus autonomy - Seeking out involvement. - Looking for close and warm relationship. - Unwilling to sacrifice entire identity to even the most satisfying relationship. - Barely spending time to go through their profile.

Con’t Inani (25 year-old single girl) - “single market.” - The world of married people is different from my world. - preferred to connect with single and to spend her time to be with them. - 400 and something single friends and less than 50 married. - tended to keep separateness from married individuals in her relationships through Facebook.

Con’t Fara (23 year-old single girl) “ My friends and our close and warm relationships in the past and now. I like to involve with them. What are they doing now? About their life, their education, even I like to know they are still single or married.” “I liked to be friend with them but I did not know how I could do it. Finally I inserted some of them but I can not leave them comment.You know because we are different, and we have different cultures, ethnics, religions. So I prefer just to view them. I like to leave comment but I am worried about misconception.”

Con’t Openness versus Closedness Sharing information Recognizing private and public sphere Having conflict between self-disclosure and maintaining privacy Along with the need to disclose, we have an equally impotent drive to maintain space. Even the strongest relationships require some distance.

Con’t “...but it is safe for us to keep something privately because they are very personal. We are Muslim so we are not allowed to share everything. I do not allow everyone to see some of my pictures and to get my information…” “Only my close and full friends can access them [photos] because I would like to have private situation.”

Con’t “... basically I don’t let everybody knows about my relationships, my age. Even previous time I did not put my real name. I had written my nickname. But in Facebook I do not know why I put my real name . I already enclosed my real name...” “I never leave any comments that show my real feelings and thoughts about my friend, family members, only for gossiping. If I feel closer and more intimate with my friends, I leave comment. About them frankly, it is ok but about others I never do it.”

Con’t “... Sometimes I write long sentences and change my mind to post it so I delete the whole comment. Even though my intention is good but they think in different way and reflect differently. May be they return me back in a bad way. Sometimes I write a sentence and then ask myself is this word tricky? I change it or delete it. So it is the avoidance.”

Con’t Certainty versus Uncertainty -having similarity -having information seeking

Con’t “From first I cannot trust them. I should try them so I will ask them more information about themselves and then I decide to accept them or not.”

Con’t Having some similarities with me is important. If we have same thing, the same motivation. I have friends from “friend club” we follow the same hobbies, movies, novels. I chat with them to exchange our idea about whatever. Sometimes I look at their name. I am a choosy person. I am not comfortable with everyone. I like to have much communication to know them. Even sometimes it depends on my intuition. If my feeling says ok they are good. I have tendency to choose. Some people say ok ok you will be my friend. But I really should check who is that? I will check it by mutual friend.”

Conclusion Our relationships through social networking sites like our relationships in real life suffer from some tensions. It was realized that Facebook users confronted all sorts of relational dialectics in their Facebook relationships but more openness-closedness and in order to manage the tensions took selection and separation strategies.

Many Thanks for Your Attention and Patience