Computers in Human Behavior 30 (2014) 50–58

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers in Human Behavior

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh

Facebook self-disclosure: Examining the role of traits, social cohesion,

and motives
Erin E. Hollenbaugh a,⇑, Amber L. Ferris b
a
School of Communication Studies, Kent State University at Stark, USA
b
Department of Speech and Theatre, The University of Akron Wayne College, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Facebook has been shown to be the most popular social network in the United States. Facebook not only
Available online 23 August 2013 has implications in the online world, but face-to-face connections are also affected by this medium. This
study explores the uses of Facebook for self-disclosure behavior utilizing the uses and gratifications per-
Keywords: spective. Using a convenience sample of Facebook users, this study examines individual and sociological
Facebook factors as well as Facebook motives to discover the impact on depth, breadth, and amount of user self-
Self-disclosure disclosure. Path analyses showed that the Big Five personality factors, self-esteem, social cohesion, and
Uses and gratifications
motives contribute to self-disclosure dimensions. However, demographic variables did not impact disclo-
Big five
Motives
siveness. Limitations are discussed and directions for future research are proposed.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Since its founding in February, 2004, Facebook has become one
of the leading social networking websites (Facebook.com, 2013a).
Facebook.com (2013b) reports that at the time of this writing,
the site has more than one billion total active users, with over
600 million users accessing the site daily all over the world. In
the United States, Facebook is a staple for social networking. In a
survey of over 2000 American adults, Hampton, Goulet, Rainie,
and Purcell (2011) found that 92% of all social network users are
on Facebook, and slightly more than half of those users access
Facebook on a daily basis. The results showed that more than just
teenagers are using this medium. Hampton et al. (2011) found that
the average Facebook users are 38 years old, female (58%), have at
least some education beyond high school (69%), and are primarily
white (78%). With so many people accessing and using this tech-
nology each day, it is important to examine how the medium is
used and the possible implications of this use.
One reason Facebook is important to examine is the high
amounts of self-disclosure that are often displayed within this
medium. Self-disclosure, the revelation of personal information
(Derlega, Metts, Petronio, & Margulis, 1993), can have immediate
implications due to the fact that users are linked into both virtual
and face-to-face friends. The average Facebook user has 229
Abbreviations: U&G, Uses and gratifications theory; BFI, Big Five Inventory;
RSDS, Revised Self-disclosure Scale.
⇑ Corresponding author. Address: Kent State University at Stark, 6000 Frank Ave.
NW, North Canton, OH 44720, USA. Tel.: +1 330 244 3458; fax: +1 330 494 6121.
E-mail address: ehollen2@kent.edu (E.E. Hollenbaugh).
friends, and nearly half of the user’s social network is a part of their
Facebook world (Hampton et al., 2011). This means that many peo-
ple in networks offline are also present in Facebook, including
friends, neighbors, classmates, coworkers, and family. Therefore,
the real-world ramifications of Facebook disclosures are important.
Although Facebook can bring us together and give us a sense of
belonging, there may also be harmful effects of self-disclosure.
The purpose of this study is to determine the predictors of self-
disclosive behavior on Facebook. Doing so would not only reveal a
clearer picture of the social environment of Facebook, but would
also allow scholars to predict the population most at-risk for highly
disclosive and potentially damaging Facebook self-disclosure.
Additionally, understanding predictors of self-disclosive behavior
may reveal those users who are most likely to benefit from increas-
ingly intimate relationships online. Toward that end, a review of
uses and gratifications theory will be provided as it applies to dis-
closiveness on Facebook, followed by a study testing the predictors
of disclosive behavior on Facebook.
1.1. Self-disclosure on Facebook
According to research by the Pew Internet and American Life
Project (Smith, 2011), American adults say they are drawn to social
media sites such as Facebook to maintain contact with friends and
family, as well as to re-establish connections with old friends. It is
not surprising, then, that Facebook is characterized by high
amounts of self-disclosure because it is well-established that
self-disclosure is a crucial element in relationship development
(e.g., Altman & Taylor, 1973). Facebook’s mission statement is ‘‘to

0747-5632/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.055
 E.E. Hollenbaugh, A.L. Ferris / Computers in Human Behavior 30 (2014) 50–58
make the world more open and connected’’ (Facebook.com, 2013b,
para. 1), which rests on its users’ willingness to present their inner
thoughts and emotional states on Facebook. The characteristics of
Facebook encourage such self-disclosure (Mazer, Murphy, & Si-
monds, 2007). Facebook’s status update box asks ‘‘what’s on your
mind,’’ prompting users to disclose information. The social net-
working site has a user-friendly platform that allows for easy ac-
cess to picture posting, status updates, and other web content to
be shared with one’s network in both web and mobile formats.
While Facebook functions as an outlet for disclosure, aspects of
the internet as a medium encourage increasing amounts of per-
sonal self-disclosure. For example, social information processing
theory explains that users can adapt their verbal cues to accommo-
date the largely text-based environment of computer-mediated
communication (Walther, 1992). Additionally, the increased
amount, depth, and breadth of self-disclosure is one way that Face-
book users can express affinity to compensate for the largely tex-
tual nature of the online environment (Walther, 1992).
Schumaker and Van Der Heide (2011) argued that self-disclosure
is one vehicle that Facebook users may employ to express emo-
tions when richer nonverbal communication channels are not
present. Along with the lack of nonverbal cues, the asynchronous
nature of most Facebook activity can cause a person to self-disclose
intimate information (Suler, 2004; Walther, 1996).
Not only does the internet as a medium lend itself to self-disclo-
sure, but interpersonal aspects of disclosure are relevant to Face-
book. There are several dimensions of self-disclosure, such as
amount, depth, breadth, intent, valence, and honesty/accuracy
(Altman & Taylor, 1973; Wheeless, 1978). General disclosiveness
is represented by amount, depth, and breadth of self-disclosure
in the present study. Amount of self-disclosure is conceptualized
as the number of disclosures made on Facebook. Depth is charac-
terized by more personal or intimate disclosures. People disclose
with more breadth when they discuss a wide variety of topics.
1.2. Uses and gratifications theory
Uses and gratifications theory (U&G) has proven to be a useful
and popular theory to frame the study of computer-mediated com-
munication, including Facebook use. U&G proposes that media
uses and effects are best understood within the context of the indi-
vidual’s psychological and sociological characteristics, as well as
his/her motives for using a medium (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch,
1974). People approach media with goals in mind that they wish
to fulfill, making this a functional perspective (Rubin, 2002). This
limited effects model requires researchers to consider each of these
variables when examining the whole picture of media effects. Ex-
tant Facebook research using U&G has largely explored the motives
for Facebook use and significant predictors of Facebook use.
1.2.1. Motives for Facebook use
Modern U&G studies often focus on understanding the motives,
or reasons people use media, which in turn helps predict the grat-
ifications they will gain from media use (Rubin, 2002; Ruggiero,
2000). Researchers have been very interested in discovering the
motives for Facebook use, most often under the U&G framework
(e.g., Hunt, Atkin, & Krishnan, 2012; Joinson, 2008; Raacke &
Bonds-Raacke, 2008; Sheldon, 2008a, 2008b; Smock, Ellison,
Lampe, & Wohn, 2011; Tosun, 2012; Yang & Brown, 2013). This
body of research focuses on developing motive typologies as well
as the effects of these motives on Facebook use.
Many researchers have developed motives typologies for social
network use. Often combined with interpersonal motives, social
networking research has shown several major motives for use.
These include relationship maintenance, to pass the time, virtual
community (i.e., develop new relationships), entertainment, cool-
51
ness, and companionship (Sheldon, 2008a, 2008b; Special & Li-Bar-
ber, 2012). Other researchers have found additional motives
including control (i.e., telling someone to do something; Baek, Hol-
ton, Harp, & Yaschur, 2011), promoting work/professional
advancement (Baek et al., 2011; Papacharissi & Mendelson,
2011), photo-related activities (Raacke & Bonds-Raacke, 2008; To-
sun, 2012), and learning/academic purposes (Hew, 2011; Raacke &
Bonds-Raacke, 2008).
Motives for using Facebook are linked to one’s real-world com-
munication experiences, as the research reviewed above has
shown. Research has also shown that motives are linked to self-
disclosure. In a study on Facebook and self-disclosure, Special
and Li-Barber (2012) found that those who were motivated to
use the medium for entertainment tended to disclose more infor-
mation on the site. Additionally, those that were highly disclosive
were more likely to use Facebook to pass the time (Special & Li-
Barber, 2012). Tosun (2012) found that those people who felt they
could disclose their ‘‘true self’’ online were more likely to use Face-
book to establish new relationships and manage romantic relation-
ships. Additionally, research conducted by Smock et al. (2011)
showed that people who use Facebook for expressive information
sharing motivations were more likely to post status updates.
Existing research has shown that individual variables should be
taken into consideration when examining the use of new media
(e.g., Hills & Argyle, 2003; Miura & Yamashita, 2007). Predictor
variables such as personality traits, sociological variables, and
demographics have an impact on the dynamics of self-disclosure
on Facebook. These variables often play a role in the motives peo-
ple have for using Facebook as well as their self-disclosive behav-
iors online.
1.3. Predictors of Facebook use
1.3.1. Individual variables
Two main individual factors are examined in this research: per-
sonality traits and self-esteem. Personality factors have often been
used as variables in U&G research (Ruggiero, 2000). The ‘‘Big Five’’
personality traits are neuroticism, agreeableness, openness, consci-
entiousness, and extraversion (John, Donahue, & Kentle, 1991). In a
study on Facebook use and personality traits, Ross et al. (2009)
found that personality traits were linked to several functions and
motivations. For example, participants who were highly extro-
verted were more likely to join Facebook groups. With regards to
openness, those that were highly open were more likely to indicate
a need to be sociable on Facebook. People low in neuroticism were
more likely to use photos on Facebook, whereas people highly neu-
rotic enjoyed the Wall function (Ross et al., 2009). Additionally, in a
study of Australian Facebook users, Ryan and Xenos (2011) found
that Facebook users are more likely to be extraverted and narcissis-
tic. People who scored high on exhibitionism were more likely to
prefer photos and status updates. As found in Ross et al. (2009),
people who were more neurotic preferred using the wall function
on Facebook.
In addition to personality characteristics, self-esteem, or the be-
lief that one has self-worth (Crocker & Park, 2004), is another indi-
vidual variable that should be considered when examining online
self-disclosure. The social compensation hypothesis posits that
people use media to fulfill social needs that are unmet in everyday
life (Davis & Kraus, 1989). Specifically, the internet may be a forum
for those who are inhibited in everyday life to branch out and form
social relationships (McKenna, Green, & Gleason, 2002). According
to this perspective, people with low self-esteem who may other-
wise be withdrawn in social situations have the opportunity to
flourish on Facebook.
There is some Facebook research that supports the social com-
pensation hypothesis. Facebook users with lower self-esteem tend
52 E.E. Hollenbaugh, A.L. Ferris / Computers in Human Behavior 30 (2014) 50–58
to have more Facebook friends (Lee, Moore, Park, & Park, 2012),
spend more time on Facebook, and have a stronger emotional con-
nection to Facebook (Kalpidou, Costin, & Morris, 2011). Undergrad-
uate students in Forest and Wood’s (2012) studies who were lower
in self-esteem saw self-disclosure on Facebook as appealing, but
their disclosures were generally more negative than positive.
1.3.2. Social cohesion
Although the research above partially support the social com-
pensatory features of Facebook, the social enhancement hypothesis
argues that people behave online in similar ways as they do face-
to-face (Valkenburg, Schouten, & Peter, 2005). In other words,
those who are sociable and have strong connections offline are
likely to benefit from this sociability and maintain highly social
Facebook pages, rife with self-disclosure and connection. There-
fore, it may be useful to measure sociological indices when explor-
ing how users self-disclose on Facebook.
One sociological variable that may be of particular interest with
respect to the social enhancement hypothesis is social cohesion.
Social cohesion is the connection one feels to a larger group, estab-
lished through social bonds (Yamamoto, 2011). Members of so-
cially cohesive groups feel a sense of engagement through their
groups (Rosell & et al., 1995).
Papacharissi and Mendelson’s (2011) research supports the
assumption that those with stronger real-life ties utilize Facebook
to strengthen these ties. Results showed that participants who
used Facebook for expressive information sharing, habitual/pass
the time, relaxation/entertainment, coolness, companionship, so-
cial interaction, and professional advancement were most likely
to score high on social capital measures (staying connected, meet-
ing new people, etc.). In other words, those who were socially ac-
tive in their real life were more likely to benefit from Facebook’s
ability to connect with others (Papacharissi & Mendelson, 2011).
According to Hampton et al. (2011), Facebook users have more
confidants and closer ties to offline network than others, again in
support of the social enhancement hypothesis. Examining both
self-esteem and social cohesion in the present study will provide
an opportunity to test the social compensation and social enhance-
ment hypotheses.
1.3.3. Demographic factors
In addition to individual and sociological characteristics, demo-
graphics can impact self-disclosure on Facebook. Sex is the most
commonly examined individual difference with regard to self-dis-
closure (Dindia, 2002). Generally speaking, research has shown
that women tend to disclose more personal information in face-
to-face contexts than men (e.g., Buhrke & Fuqua, 1987; Davidson
& Duberman, 1982; Jourard, 1971; Morton, 1978). This trend has
been supported in online communication, as well (e.g., Peter, Valk-
enburg, & Schouten, 2005; Punyanunt-Carter, 2006).
When looking at Facebook specifically, there have been some
studies that show sex differences in Facebook use and motives.
Sheldon (2008b) found that female students used Facebook to pass
the time, for entertainment, and for maintaining existing relation-
ships. Males in this study, however, tended to use Facebook more
to develop new relationships and to develop romantic relation-
ships. Hunt et al. (2012) also found that women used Facebook
more for entertainment and interpersonal communication mo-
tives. With regards to self-disclosure on Facebook, Special and Li-
Barber (2012) found that males disclosed more basic information
and contact information than females.
Other studies have shown that men and women do not differ in
why they use Facebook. When examining motives for making a
relationship ‘‘Facebook official,’’ Fox and Warber (2013) found that
there were no differences in motivations between men and women
(interpersonal or social) in making a relationship status disclosure.
Raacke and Bonds-Raacke (2008) found that there were no gender
differences in reported motivations for Facebook use between men
and women. Additionally, Baek et al. (2011) found no gender dif-
ferences in posting links and motivations on Facebook.
Finally, age appears to be a potentially important predictor to
include in this study. Because Facebook users’ ages range widely
and the average Facebook user is 38 years old (Hampton et al.,
2011), age may play an important part in the self-disclosive behav-
iors of Facebook users. Existing research suggests that younger
people tend to disclose more than older people in face-to-face
(e.g., Knapp, Ellis, & Williams, 1980; Sinha, 1972) and computer-
mediated communication (e.g., Ma & Leung, 2006). Much of the
existing Facebook research samples from undergraduate students;
thus, the participants do not vary much in age. However, age differ-
ences may exist in the broader Facebook population.
1.4. Research questions
U&G is a useful model for examining the predictors of self-dis-
closive behavior on Facebook. Fig. 1 presents the model tested in
this study. It is expected that individual and sociological variables
will predict motives for using Facebook, which in turn will predict
Facebook disclosiveness. In this study, disclosiveness is considered
a particular type of media use, which is fitting for U&G. To explore
the relationships among study variables, the following research
questions were posed:
RQ1: What individual variables (age, sex, Big Five traits, self-
esteem), sociological variables (social cohesion), and Facebook
motives characterize large amounts of self-disclosure on
Facebook?
RQ2: What individual variables (age, sex, Big Five traits, self-
esteem), sociological variables (social cohesion), and Facebook
motives characterize more depth of self-disclosure on
Facebook?
RQ3: What individual variables (age, sex, Big Five traits, self-
esteem), sociological variables (social cohesion), and Facebook
motives characterize more breadth of self-disclosure on
Facebook?
2. Methods
A cross-sectional survey design was used to test the study’s re-
search questions and hypotheses. The participants and procedures
are described in the following sections.
2.1. Participants
Participants were adults over the age of 18 who posted on Face-
book at least once per month. Following approval from the Institu-
tional Review Board, the researchers attempted to collect a random
sample by utilizing a random number generator and the ‘‘People’’
directory provided by Facebook. However, the recruitment mes-
sage was quickly reported as SPAM, which blocked the researchers
from further data collection in this way. Thereafter, the researchers
ultimately used a convenience sampling method, posting a call for
participation in numerous venues, including listservs, Facebook
groups, the researcher’s home institutions’ faculty listservs to cir-
culate among students, and the researchers’ Facebook pages. Every
attempt was made to collect data from Facebook users that were
not personally connected to the researchers via a snowball tech-
nique (asking friends to post the link on their wall), but this could
not be guaranteed.
Data was collected from 305 Facebook users; however, four
cases were excluded because they reported no Facebook usage.
The final data set include 301 Facebook users. Participants’ ages
 E.E. Hollenbaugh, A.L. Ferris / Computers in Human Behavior 30 (2014) 50–58 53

Individual
Variables
Age
Sex
Self-esteem
Extraversion
Conscientiousness
Neuroticism
Agreeableness
Openness
Facebook Motives
Virtual Community Self-Disclosure
Companionship Depth
Exhibitionism Breadth
Relationship Maintenance Amount
Passing Time

Sociological
Variable
Social Cohesion

Fig. 1. Proposed model of self-disclosure in Facebook.

ranged from 18 to 68 years (M = 31.85, SD = 12.92). The sample 2.3.1. Self-esteem

was predominantly women (n = 232, 77.1%; males n = 68, 22.6%)
who were Caucasian (n = 276, 91.7%). Participants logged onto
Facebook an average of 8.24 times per day (SD = 22.31), using Face-
book a total of 109.67 min per day (SD = 125.10). On average, they
had 434.98 Facebook friends (SD = 758.16).
Trait self-esteem was measured with Rosenberg’s (1979) 10-
item self-esteem scale. This 5-point, Likert-type scale measures
trait self-esteem. Five items were reverse-coded, and then scores
were summed and averaged to reveal each participant’s scores.
Higher scores indicate higher self-esteem.

2.2. Procedures 2.3.2. ‘‘Big Five’’ personality traits

John et al.’s (1991) Big Five Inventory (BFI) was used to test
After providing informed consent, participants completed a bat- extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and
tery of surveys designed in Qualtrics. Data for this study was a sub- openness. The BFI has undergone extensive testing, resulting in a
set of this larger data set. Personality characteristics were relatively short, reliable, and valid instrument (see John, Naumann,
measured first, followed by motives for using Facebook, self-disclo- & Soto, 2008, for a thorough review of the BFI). This 5-point, Likert-
sure on Facebook, and demographic and descriptive information. type scale asks participants to indicate how much they agree that
they are like the 44 phrases in the scale. Each dimension is mea-
2.3. Measures sured by 8–10 items. When averaged, higher scored indicate more
of the measured personality trait.
All measures in this study were found to be reliable. Table 1 in-
cludes means, standard deviations, and Cronbach’s alphas for all 2.3.3. Social cohesion
study variables. Each measure is described in detail below. Social cohesion was measured by Malone, Pillow, and Osman
(2012) 10-item General Belongingness Scale. All items were mea-
Table 1
sured on a 5-point, Likert-type scale, with 5 indicating high social
Means, standard deviations, and Cronbach’s alphas for all study variables. cohesion. Five items were reverse-coded and all items were aver-
aged to form a composite measure of cohesion.
M SD a
Age (in years) 31.85 12.92
Self-esteem 3.94 .68 .88 2.3.4. Facebook motives
Extraversion 3.43 .80 .89 There have been several inventories of Facebook motives for-
Conscientiousness 3.81 .55 .79 warded by researchers. Sheldon’s (2008b) Facebook motives index
Neuroticism 2.93 .69 .83 appeared to be heavily used in existing research. Therefore, it was
Agreeableness 3.79 .57 .80
adopted in this study. This 26-item measure asks participants to
Openness 3.76 .59 .84
Social cohesion 3.89 .73 .94 indicate on a 5-point scale how likely they are to use Facebook
for each of six motives – relationship maintenance, passing time,
Facebook motives
Virtual community 2.02 .92 .89 virtual community, entertainment, coolness, and companionship.
Companionship 1.93 1.07 .94 To ensure that we measured all relevant motives, we included 10
Exhibitionism 2.01 1.00 .90 items from Barker and Ota’s (2011) research in the virtual commu-
Relationship maintenance 4.18 .72 .87
nity and companionship motives, as well as three items from Hol-
Passing time 4.05 .92 r = .66
lenbaugh’s (2011) blogging motives index measuring
Self-disclosure dimensions
exhibitionism. The full index included 39 items.
Amount 2.34 .64 .71
Depth 1.92 .73 .79
Responses on the full index were subjected to a two-stage
Breadth 3.37 .79 .76 exploratory factor analysis with Varimax rotation to reveal latent
factors. Analyses revealed a five-factor solution, including 24 items
Note: Age was measured with one item each. Therefore, reliability estimates could
not be computed. All other variables were measured on a 1–5 scale, with 5 repre-
and accounting for 71.60% of the variance. See Table 2 for items,
senting more of the measured variable. factor loadings, and variance explained by each motive. Scores
Note: Pass time Facebook motive was measured with two items, yielding a signif- were computed by summing and averaging each participant’s re-
icant, large correlation (r = .66, p < .001). sponses on the items loaded on each factor.
54 E.E. Hollenbaugh, A.L. Ferris / Computers in Human Behavior 30 (2014) 50–58

Table 2
Factor loadings for final 5-factor solution of Facebook motives.

1 2 3 4 5
Factor 1: Virtual community
To meet new people like me .87
To meet new friends .87
To meet people like me .84
To find more interesting people than in real life .67
To develop a romantic relationship .67
To find companionship .65
To see people with a similar background .62
Factor 2: Companionship
To feel less lonely .86
Because it makes me feel less lonely .85
So I won’t be alone .84
Because there’s no one to talk to .81
Because I have no one to talk or be with .79
Factor 3: Exhibitionism
For attention .84
To get attention .84
Because my posts make me cool among my peers .76
To gain fame or notoriety .74
Because I like when people read things about me .66
Factor 4: Relationship maintenance
To communicate with my friends .84
To stay in touch with friends .82
To get in touch with people I know .78
To post a message on my friend’s wall .76
To send a message to a friend .74
1 2 3 4 5
Factor 5: Passing time
To occupy my time .85
To pass time when bored .85
Variance explained (%) 18.13 17.45 14.68 14.63 6.71

Note: Factor loadings and variance reported from final, rotated factor solution.

Factor 1, virtual community, included seven items from the cor-
responding a priori motive that measure people’s need to use Face-
book to forge new relationships. Factor 2, companionship, consisted
of five items from the a priori category. Participants who scored
high on this motive used Facebook to compensate for loneliness.
Exhibitionism was Factor 3, which measures participants’ desire
to use Facebook to get attention. This factor included five items
from the a priori motives of coolness and exhibitionism. The fourth
factor, relationship maintenance, included five items from the same
a priori category. This motive represents using Facebook to sustain
existing relationships. Factor 5, passing time, consisted of two items
that were highly correlated with one another. These items repre-
sent a well-established motive of media use – to relieve boredom.
2.3.5. Self-disclosure dimensions
The researchers used a modified version of Wheeless’ (1978)
Revised Self-disclosure Scale (RSDS) to measure amount and depth
of self-disclosure. This scale asks participants to indicate how
much they agree on a scale from 1 (‘‘strongly disagree’’) to 5
(‘‘strongly agree’’) with each statement about self-disclosive
behavior. Amount is measured by seven items, and depth is mea-
sured by five. The researchers revised the scale to fit within the
Facebook context. Responses were averaged for each of the sub-
scales to reveal scores for amount and depth of self-disclosure.
A close examination of the RSDS in relation to foundational re-
search in self-disclosure (e.g., Altman & Taylor, 1973) revealed that
breadth, a central dimension of self-disclosure in much disclosure
research and theory, was not measured in this scale. Therefore, five
items were created to measure breadth of self-disclosure, including
items such as ‘‘My Facebook posts range over a wide variety of top-
ics’’ and ‘‘My Facebook posts tend to center around one subject of
interest’’ (reverse coded).
2.3.6. Demographics and descriptive information
Participants reported age, sex, ethnicity, and amount of time
spent on Facebook on an average day to describe the sample. The
researchers also asked participants to log onto their Facebook ac-
count to look up and provide their number of Facebook friends.
Age and sex were used to address the study’s research questions.
3. Results
Path analyses were conducted with regression to test the re-
search questions. U&G was consulted to determine how the inde-
pendent variables would be entered into the models (see Fig. 1).
To conduct the path analysis, five separate regressions were run
to determine the predictors of Facebook motives (see Table 3). In
these analyses, Facebook motives were regressed on individual
and sociological variables (age, sex, self-esteem, Big Five traits,
and social cohesion. Results are summarized in Table 3 and below,
as they serve as indirect predictors of certain disclosive behaviors.
Next, hierarchical regressions were run on each of the three self-
disclosure dimensions. Individual and sociological variables were
entered as the first block of predictors, followed by Facebook mo-
tives as the second block (see Table 4). This two-stage method of
regression analysis allows the researchers to examine direct and
indirect predictors of the outcome variables. See Fig. 2 for signifi-
cant study results.
3.1. Amount of self-disclosure
RQ1 was posed to explore the characteristics of Facebook users
who disclose large amounts of personal information. The total
model explained 17% of the variance in amount of self-disclosure,
F(14, 285) = 4.05, p < .001. Two motives were direct predictors of
 E.E. Hollenbaugh, A.L. Ferris / Computers in Human Behavior 30 (2014) 50–58 55

Table 3
Regressing Facebook motives on individual and sociological variables.

Virtual community Companion-ship Exhibitionism Relationship maintenance Passing time

Predictors Final b Final b Final b Final b Final b
Age .08 .05 .04 .03 .27***
Sex .11 .04 .03 .10 .09
Self-esteem .09 .12 .05 .03 .01
Extraversion .10 .03 .02 .08 .03
Conscientiousness .16* .11 .15* .00 .11
Neuroticism .07 .11 .05 .05 .03
Agreeableness .13* .00 .17** .01 .03
Openness .06 .12* .13* .13* .04
Social cohesion .15 .38*** .20* .13 .07
Model R2 .09** .34*** .16*** .04 .10***

Note: All betas are standardized betas. Although openness was a significant individual predictor of relationship maintenance, this predictor was not interpreted in the present
study because the model was not significant. N = 301.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
***
p < .001.

Table 4 online social networks disclosed more intimate, personal informa-

Regressing self-disclosure on individual variables, social cohesion, and motives. tion on Facebook than others. Conscientiousness and agreeable-
Amount Depth Breadth ness were indirect predictors through the virtual community
Predictors b b b
motive (see Table 3 and Fig. 2). Less conscientious, more agreeable
Step 1 individuals who were motivated by the desire to meet new people
Age .02 .05 .00 online disclosed information of greater depth.
Sex .08 .10 .10
Self-esteem .12 .14 .22**
Extraversion .09 .15* .08 3.3. Breadth of self-disclosure
Conscientiousness .00 .01 .01
Neuroticism .00 .02 .22** RQ3 asked what variables predicted disclosing more breadth of
Agreeableness .03 .02 .06
Openness .05 .08 .20***
information on Facebook. The total model explained 18% of the
Social cohesion .02 .07 .07 variance in breadth of self-disclosure, F(14, 285) = 4.43, p < .001.
Four variables served as direct predictors: self-esteem, neuroti-
Step 2 cism, openness, and relationship maintenance motive (see Table 4).
Virtual Community .09 .18** .05 Not surprisingly, people who are more open, using Facebook to
Companionship .06 .14 .16 maintain existing relationships were more likely to post about a
Exhibitionism .21** .12 .07
variety of topics. Additionally, those with lower self-esteem and
Relationship maintenance .14* .09 .29***
Passing Time .03 .00 .01 less neuroticism disclosed with more breadth on Facebook.
Final model R2 .17*** .24*** .18***

Note: All betas are final standardized betas on the last step of the regression.
N = 301.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .05.
***
p < .001.
amount of self-disclosure: exhibitionism and relationship mainte-
nance (see Table 4). Participants who used Facebook to get atten-
tion and to maintain existing relationships posted the largest
amount of personal information about themselves. The path anal-
ysis showed several indirect predictors as well, mediated through
the exhibitionism motive (see Table 3 and Fig. 2). Participants low-
er in conscientiousness, agreeableness, and social cohesion, as well
as those higher in openness disclosed more information on
Facebook.
3.2. Depth of self-disclosure
Depth of self-disclosure was explored in RQ2. To determine the
characteristics associated with participants who disclosed more
intimate information on Facebook, the path analysis was exam-
ined. The total model explained 24% of the variance in depth of
self-disclosure, F(14, 285) = 6.42, p < .001. Extraversion and virtual
community were direct predictors of depth (see Table 4). Specifi-
cally, more extraverted individuals who used Facebook to develop
4. Discussion
This study used U&G to examine the predictors of self-disclo-
sure on Facebook. Ultimately, the purpose of this study was to
determine which predictors and motives were characteristic of dis-
closive Facebook users. Facebook users disclosing the largest
amount of information used the medium for exhibitionism and
relationship maintenance. These participants were also likely to
be less conscientious, be less agreeable, perceive less social cohe-
sion, and be more open. The profile of the most disclosive Facebook
users in terms of amount, therefore, includes those who want to
maintain their existing relationships, as well as those who want
to get attention, perhaps because of their diminished social cohe-
sion and agreeableness offline.
Facebook users who were more extraverted and who used Face-
book to establish a virtual community disclosed the most personal
information. Less conscientiousness and more agreeableness were
indirect predictors of depth of self-disclosure through the virtual
community motive. Finally, Facebook users posted about a wider
variety of topics when they had lower self-esteem, lower neuroti-
cism, and more openness. Additionally, participants who used
Facebook to maintain their existing relationships discussed more
breadth of topics.
The results of this study are in many ways confirming of exist-
ing research and theory. U&G provides a helpful framework with
which to study Facebook self-disclosure. Each of the total models
predicting self-disclosiveness was significant at the p < .001 level,
56 E.E. Hollenbaugh, A.L. Ferris / Computers in Human Behavior 30 (2014) 50–58
Self-esteem
Virtual
Community
(conscientiousness-,
agreeableness+)
Companionship
(conscientiousness-,
openness+, social
cohesion-)
Exhibitionism
(conscientiousness-,
agreeableness-,
openness+, social
cohesion-)
Relationship
Maintenance
Passing Time
(men)
Neuroticism
Positive β
Negative β
Fig. 2. Model of significant profile characteristics of Facebook users’ self-disclosure (SD). Significant predictors of each Facebook motive are listed in the box in parentheses.
See Table 4 for beta weights. Solid lines indicate positive relationships, and dashed lines indicate negative relationships.
and the only motive that was not significantly explained by the
predictor variables was relationship maintenance. Scholars should
employ U&G as they continue to examine such individualized, ac-
tive uses of the internet.
Facebook is a highly social environment, and its users do seem
to adjust their verbal communication to convey affection and
sociability (Walther, 1992). Open, extraverted individuals who
use Facebook for relationship maintenance and to establish a vir-
tual community are generally more disclosive, as measured by
amount, depth, and breadth of self-disclosure. This is fitting con-
sidering our traditional views of the role of self-disclosure in rela-
tionship development (Altman & Taylor, 1973).
Along with the more expected findings, there were several new
contributions made to the literature. For example, using Facebook
for exhibitionism resulted in high amounts of self-disclosure.
Although little research has supported this, it is not surprising
due to the highly textual Facebook environment; self-disclosure
is likely to get people’s attention. Another quite surprising finding
was the lack of significant relationships among age, sex, and self-
disclosure dimensions. These two demographic characteristics –
sex in particular – have consistently shown to affect self-disclosure
patterns. Perhaps the social environment of Facebook where every-
one, regardless of sex or age, is encouraged to self-disclose is scrub-
bing out these traditional differences. On the other hand, an
examination of the relatively low means and standard deviations
of scores for the self-disclosure dimensions in this study suggest
that perhaps Facebook users are becoming more selective in when,
how, and to whom they disclose.
In addition to the findings regarding predictors of self-disclosive
behavior, another contribution of this study concerns the motives
for using Facebook. The exploratory factor analyses revealed the
Extraversion
SD Amount
SD Depth
SD Breadth
Openness
same motives as previous research (e.g., Sheldon, 2008b), with
the exception of coolness. Items from the coolness and exhibition
motive loaded together, revealing the latent motive exhibitionism.
Due in part to the ubiquity of Facebook, it is no longer very ‘‘cool’’
to maintain a Facebook profile. In fact, anecdotal evidence would
suggest that it is, in fact cooler to not be on Facebook. However,
Facebook users can get attention and establish a sense of coolness
through the things they post on Facebook.
This research has also contributed to the discipline by revealing
the individual and social factors that affect people’s motives for
using Facebook (see Table 3). The Big Five seem to be useful in this
model, as consciousness, agreeableness, and openness predicted
motives, while extraversion, neuroticism, and openness directly
predicted self-disclosure dimensions. However, age and sex made
little to no impact in the total model to predict motives or self-dis-
closure. The only significant difference among these well-estab-
lished predictors of online behavior was that younger
participants were more motivated to use Facebook to pass time
than older participants.
This study’s findings related to self-esteem and social cohesion
lend support to the social compensation hypothesis. Although
social cohesion was not a direct predictor of self-disclosure, it
was inversely related to the motives of companionship and exhibi-
tionism. In other words, those who felt less connected to their
social groups were drawn to Facebook to feel less lonely by con-
necting to others, as well as to get attention. Similarly, those with
lower self-esteem were more likely to disclose about a variety of
topics on Facebook. In these ways, it appears that Facebook is
one way that some choose to fill a void in their lives.
On the other hand, there is some support for the social enhance-
ment hypothesis as well. Participants who were more open as a
 E.E. Hollenbaugh, A.L. Ferris / Computers in Human Behavior 30 (2014) 50–58
personality trait disclosed with more breadth and tended to use
Facebook for companionship and exhibitionism. Extraverted Face-
book users reported greater depth of self-disclosure. Clearly the
use of Facebook is complex enough to accommodate all types of
individuals, whether they are searching to compensate for some-
thing missing in their everyday lives or to extend their existing
sociability online.
4.1. Limitations and future research directions
The implications of this study should be interpreted with some
reservation due to study’s limitations. Facebook in itself posed a
limitation with regard to data collection. As noted previously, at-
tempts to randomly select users through the ‘‘People’’ directory
were met with spam reports. Based on this experience, random
sampling may not be a reality in the Facebook realm. There is a
general distrust of email requests, so it is becoming more difficult
to convince people to participate in social scientific research. As
advertisements increase in newsfeeds and viruses are spread
through unknown links, it is becoming increasingly difficult to gain
trust from strangers via Facebook. Paid advertisements can be uti-
lized, but researchers are limited to people who self-select into
their study. At the time of this study, it seems that random sam-
pling of Facebook users poses a challenge that must be met by fu-
ture researchers.
As a result of the challenges of data collection, a convenience
sample was chosen. While the sample does reach beyond the social
networks of the two researchers, this sample may not be represen-
tative of the Facebook population. This sample was predominantly
Caucasian women, and although this group does make up the
majority of Facebook users (Hampton et al., 2011), this group
was overrepresented in the present study. Perhaps sex differences
did not emerge because there were not enough men to test for
them. While the average age of the participants in this study was
lower than the average Facebook user (38 years), the study does
move Facebook research beyond the college/high school student
demographic. Future research should consider a quota sample to
mimic the Facebook landscape more closely.
Another potential limitation involves the relatively narrow
scope of measuring self-disclosure. The present study asked partic-
ipants to consider only their self-disclosive behavior, but in fact
self-disclosure does not exist in a vacuum. Instead, the social net-
working capabilities of Facebook allow for others to contribute to
the body of information about a person (Walther, Van Der Heide,
Kim, Westerman, & Tong, 2008). Facebook users can post verbal
information on others’ walls, tag each other in pictures or in geo-
graphic locations, and comment on each other’s posts, contributing
more information than one individual may disclose about him/her-
self. Furthermore, pictures may disclose more information than
words for certain types of Facebook users (Van Der Heide, D’Ange-
lo, & Schumaker, 2012). Future research should make every at-
tempt to explore how people co-create identities on Facebook by
contributing personal information about others to the greater
Facebook community through text, picture, and video.
This study revealed some intriguing findings related to self-es-
teem and social cohesion. Namely, individuals with lower self-es-
teem and less social cohesion were more disclosive, either
directly or indirectly through motives. More research is needed
to look at the reasons for and social implications of self-disclosure
in such a public format for these individuals. People with lower
self-esteem tend to disclose more negative and less positive infor-
mation on Facebook (Forest & Wood, 2012), which may be per-
ceived socially as fishing for compliments or searching for
confirmation. It is unclear how this is received within their online
networks, as well as whether or not this exchange of disclosure and
responses is personally fulfilling.
57
In conclusion, this research builds upon existing motives stud-
ies and supports the application of U&G in studying the implica-
tions of Facebook use. Individual and sociological variables, as
well as Facebook motives were shown to have a significant impact
on users’ self-disclosure. As Facebook continues to dominate the
social networking landscape, it is important to persist in making
sense of this important medium in 21st century culture.
References
Altman, I., & Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal
relationships. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Baek, K., Holton, A., Harp, D., & Yaschur, C. (2011). The links that bind: Uncovering
novel motivations for linking on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 27,
2243–2248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.07.003.
Barker, V., & Ota, H. (2011). Mixi diary versus Facebook photos: Social networking
site use among Japanese and Caucasian American females. Journal of
Intercultural Communication Research, 40, 39–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
17475759.2011.558321.
Buhrke, R., & Fuqua, D. (1987). Sex differences in same- and cross-sex supportive
relationships. Sex Roles, 17, 339–352.
Crocker, J., & Park, L. E. (2004). The costly pursuit of self-esteem. Psychological
Bulletin, 130, 392–414. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.3.392.
Davidson, L., & Duberman, L. (1982). Friendship: Communication and interactional
patterns in same-sex dyads. Sex Roles, 8, 809–822.
Davis, M. H., & Kraus, L. A. (1989). Social contact, loneliness, and mass media use: a
test of two hypotheses. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19, 1100–1124.
Derlega, V. J., Metts, S., Petronio, S., & Margulis, S. T. (1993). Self-disclosure. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Dindia, K. (2002). Self-disclosure research: Knowledge through meta-analysis. In M.
Allen, R. W. Preiss, B. M. Gayle, & N. Burrell (Eds.), Interpersonal communication
research: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 169–185). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Facebook.com (2013a). Basic info. <https://www.facebook.com/facebook/info>
Retrieved 27.03.13.
Facebook.com (2013b). Newsroom: Key facts. <http://newsroom.fb.com/Key-
Facts>. Retrieved 27.03.013.
Forest, A. L., & Wood, J. V. (2012). When social networking is not working:
Individuals with low self-esteem recognize but do not repeat the benefits of
self-disclosure on Facebook. Psychological Science, 23, 295–302. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611429709.
Fox, J., & Warber, K. M. (2013). Romantic relationship development in the age of
Facebook: An exploratory study of emerging adults’ perceptions, motives, and
behaviors. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16, 3–7. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0288.
Hampton, K. N., Goulet, L. S., Rainie, L., & Purcell, K. (2011) Social networking sites
and our lives: How people’s trust, personal relationships, and civic and political
involvement are connected to their use of social networking sites and other
technologies. Pew Internet & American Life Project. <http://www.
pewinternet.org/~/media/Files/Reports/2011/PIP%20-%20Social%
20networking%20sites%20and%20our%20lives.pdf>. Retrieved 14.05.13.
Hew, K. F. (2011). Students’ and teachers’ use of Facebook. Computers in Human
Behavior, 27, 662–676. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.11.020.
Hills, P., & Argyle, M. (2003). Uses of the internet and their relationships with
individual differences in personality. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 59–70.
Hollenbaugh, E. E. (2011). Motives for maintaining personal journal blogs.
Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14, 13–20. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1089/cyber.2009.0403.
Hunt, D., Atkin, D., & Krishnan, A. (2012). The influence of computer-mediated
communication apprehension on motives for Facebook use. Journal of
Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56, 187–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
08838151.2012.678717.
John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991). The big five inventory–Versions 4a
and 54. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and
Social Research.
John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative Big-
Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual Issues. In O. P. John,
R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research
(pp. 114–158). New York: Guilford Press.
Joinson, A. N. (2008). ‘‘Looking at’’, ‘‘looking up’’ or ‘‘keeping up with’’ people?
Motives and uses of Facebook. CHI 2008 Proceedings: Online social networking
(pp. 1027–1036).
Jourard, S. M. (1971). The transparent self (rev. ed.). New York: Van Nostrand
Reinhold.
Kalpidou, M., Costin, D., & Morris, J. (2011). The relationship between Facebook and
the well-being of undergraduate college students. Cyberpsychology, Behavior,
and Social Networking, 14, 183–189. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0061.
Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication by
the individual. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications:
Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp. 19–32). Beverly Hills, CA:
Sage.
Knapp, M. L., Ellis, D. G., & Williams, B. A. (1980). Perceptions of communication
behavior associated with relationship terms. Communication Monographs, 47,
262–278.
58 E.E. Hollenbaugh, A.L. Ferris / Computers in Human Behavior 30 (2014) 50–58
Lee, J.-E. R., Moore, D. C., Park, E.-A., & Park, S. G. (2012). Who wants to be ‘‘friend-
rich’’? Social compensatory friending on Facebook and the moderating role of
public self-consciousness. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1036–1043. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.01.006.
Ma, M. L., & Leung, L. (2006). Unwillingness-to-communicate, perceptions of the
internet and self-disclosure in ICQ. Telematics and Informatics, 23, 22–37. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2005.01.001.
Malone, G. P., Pillow, D. R., & Osman, A. (2012). The General Belongingness Scale
(GBS): Assessing achieved belongingness. Personality and Individual Differences,
52, 311–316. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.10.027.
Mazer, J. P., Murphy, R. E., & Simonds, C. J. (2007). I’ll see you on ‘‘Facebook’’: The
effects of computer-mediated teacher self-disclosure on student motivation,
affective learning, and classroom climate. Communication Education, 56, 1–17.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634520601009710.
McKenna, K. Y. A., Green, A. S., & Gleason, M. E. J. (2002). Relationship formation on
the internet: what’s the big attraction? Journal of Social Issues, 5, 9–31.
Miura, A., & Yamashita, K. (2007). Psychological and social influences on blog
writing: An online survey of blog authors in Japan. Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication, 12, 1452–1471. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.
00381.x.
Morton, T. L. (1978). Intimacy and reciprocity of exchange: A comparison of spouses
and strangers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 72–81.
Papacharissi, Z., & Mendelson, A. (2011). Toward a new(er) sociability: Uses,
gratifications and social capital on Facebook. In S. Papathanassopoulos (Ed.),
Media perspectives for the 21st century (pp. 212–230). NY: Routledge.
Peter, J., Valkenburg, P. M., & Schouten, A. P. (2005). Developing a model of
adolescent friendship formation on the internet. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 8,
423–430.
Punyanunt-Carter, N. M. (2006). An analysis of college students’ self-disclosure
behaviors on the internet. College Student Journal, 40, 329–331.
Raacke, J., & Bonds-Raacke, J. (2008). MySpace and Facebook: Applying the uses and
gratifications theory to exploring friend-networking sites. CyberPsychology &
Behavior, 11, 169–174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2007.0056.
Rosell, S. A. et al. (1995). Changing maps: Governing in a world of rapid change.
Ottawa, ON: Carleton University Press.
Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York: Basic Books Inc..
Ross, C., Orr, E. S., Sisic, M., Arsenault, J. M., Simmering, M. G., & Orr, R. R. (2009).
Personality and motivations associated with Facebook use. Computers in Human
Behavior, 25, 578–586. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.024.
Rubin, A. M. (2002). The uses-and-gratifications perspective of media effects. In J.
Bryant & D. Zillman (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd
ed., pp. 525–548). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ruggiero, T. E. (2000). Uses and gratifications in the 21st century. Mass
Communication & Society, 3, 3–37.
Ryan, T., & Xenos, S. (2011). Who uses Facebook? An investigation into the
relationship between the Big 5, shyness, narcissism, loneliness, and Facebook
usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1658–1664. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.chb.2011.02.004.
Schumaker, E. M., & Van Der Heide, B. (2011). Interpersonal feedback on Facebook:
The effects of feedback volume, valence, and mode on self-esteem. Unpublished
paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication
Association, New Orleans, LA.
Sheldon, P. (2008a). The relationship between unwillingness-to-communicate and
students’ Facebook use. Journal of Media Psychology, 20, 67–75. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105.20.2.67.
Sheldon, P. (2008b). Student favorite: Facebook and motives for its use.
Southwestern Mass Communication Journal, 23(2), 39–53.
Sinha, V. (1972). Age differences in self-disclosure. Developmental Psychology, 7,
257–258.
Smith, A. (2011). Why Americans use social media: Social networking sites are
appealing as a way to maintain contact with close ties and reconnect with old
friends. Pew Internet & American Life Project. <http://www.pewinternet.org/~/
media//Files/Reports/2011/
Why%20Americans%20Use%20Social%20Media.pdf>. Retrieved 14.05.13.
Smock, A. D., Ellison, N. B., Lampe, C., & Wohn, D. Y. (2011). Facebook as a toolkit: A
uses and gratification approach to unbundling feature use. Computers in Human
Behavior, 27, 2322–2329. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.07.011.
Special, W. P., & Li-Barber, K. T. (2012). Self-disclosure and student satisfaction with
Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 624–630. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.chb.2011.11.008.
Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7,
321–326.
Tosun, L. P. (2012). Motives for Facebook use and expressing ‘‘true self’’ on the
internet. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1510–1517. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.chb.2012.03.018.
Valkenburg, P. M., Schouten, A. P., & Peter, J. (2005). Adolescents’ identity
experiments on the internet. New Media & Society, 7, 383–402. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461444805052282.
Van Der Heide, B., D’Angelo, J. D., & Schumaker, E. M. (2012). The effects of verbal
versusphotographic self-presentation on impression formation in Facebook.
Journal of Communication, 62, 98–116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-
2466.2011.01617.x.
Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A
relational perspective. Communication Research, 19, 52–90.
Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal,
interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23,
3–43.
Walther, J. B., Van Der Heide, B., Kim, S., Westerman, D., & Tong, S. T. (2008). The role
of friends’ appearance and behavior on evaluations of individuals on Facebook:
Are we known by the company we keep? Human Communication Research, 34,
28–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00312.x.
Wheeless, L. R. (1978). A follow-up study of the relationships among trust,
disclosure, and interpersonal solidarity. Human Communication Research, 4,
143–157.
Yamamoto, M. (2011). Community newspaper use promotes social cohesion.
Newspaper Research Journal, 32, 19–33.
Yang, C.-C., & Brown, B. B. (2013). Motives for using Facebook, patterns of Facebook
activities, and late adolescents’ social adjustment to college. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 42, 403–416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-012-9836-x.