Daniele Quercia
Jon Crowcroft
ABSTRACT
Recent analyses of self-reported data (mainly survey data) seem to suggest that social rules for ending relationships are transformed on Facebook. There seem to be a radical difference between offline and online worlds: reasons for ending online relationships are different than those for ending offline ones. These preliminary findings are, however, not supported by any quantitative evidence, and that is why we put them to test. We consider a variety of factors (e.g., age, gender, personality traits) that studies in sociology have found to be associated with friendship dissolution in the real world and study whether these factors are still important in the context of Facebook. Upon analyzing 34,012 Facebook relationships, we found that, on average, a relationship is more likely to break if it is not embedded in the same social circle, if it is between two people whose ages differ, and if one of the two is neurotic or introvert. Interestingly, we also found that a relationship with a common female friend is more robust than that with a common male friend. These findings are in line with previous analyses of another popular social-networking platform, that of Twitter. All this goes to suggest that there is not much difference between offline and online worlds and, given this predictability, one could easily build tools for monitoring online relations.
- Bell, R. R. Worlds of friendships. Sage Publications, 1981.Google Scholar
- Costa, P., and Mccrae, R. The Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R). SAGE Publications, 2005.Google Scholar
- Gilbert, E., and Karahalios, K. Predicting tie strength with social media. In Proceeding of the 27th ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI) (2009). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Goldberg, L., Johnson, J., Eber, H., Hogan, R., Ashton, M., Cloninger, R., and Gough, H. The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality 40 (February 2006).Google Scholar
- Granovetter, M. Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology 91 (1985).Google Scholar
- Incite, N. Friends & Frenemies: Why We Add and Remove Facebook Friends. State of Social Media Survey, December 2011.Google Scholar
- Jong, G. D., Sonderen, E. V., and Emmelkamp, P. A comprehensive model of stress: the roles of experience stress and Neuroticism in explaining the stress- distress relationship. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics 68 (1999).Google Scholar
- Karney, B. R., and Bradbury, T. N. The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: a review of theory, methods and research. Psychological Bulletin 118 (July 1995).Google Scholar
- Kirk, D. M. Gender clustering in friendship networks: some sociological implications. Methodological Innovations Online 4 (2009).Google Scholar
- Kivran-Swaine, F., Govindan, P., and Naaman, M. The Impact of Network Structure on Breaking Ties in Online Social Networks: Unfollowing on Twitter. In Proceeding of the 29th ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI) (2011). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kwak, H., Chun, H., and Moon, S. Fragile OnlineRelationship: A First Look at Unfollow Dynamics in Twitter. In Proceeding of the 29th ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI) (2011). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Martin, J. L., and Yeung, K. T. Persistence of close personal ties over a 12-year period. Elsevier Social Networks 28 (2006).Google Scholar
- McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., and Cook, J. M. Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks. Annual Review of Sociology 27 (2001).Google Scholar
- Nettle, D. Personality: What Makes You the Way You Are. Oxford University Press, 2007.Google Scholar
- Onnela, J. P., Saramäki, J., Hyvönen, J., Szabó, G., Lazer, D., Kaski, K., Kertész, J., and Barabási, A. L. Structure and tie strengths in mobile communication networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) 104, 18 (May 2007).Google ScholarCross Ref
- Oxford. English Dictionary, 2010.Google Scholar
- Paul, P. How to Get Unfriended on Facebook. The New York Times, October 2010.Google Scholar
- Romero, D. M., and Kleinberg, J. The directed closure process in information networks with an analysis of link formation on twitter.. In Proceeding of the AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM) (2010).Google Scholar
- Rubin, L. On men and friendship. Psychoanalytic Review 73 (1986).Google Scholar
- Sibona, C., and Walczak, S. Unfriending on Facebook: Friend Request and Online/Offline Behavior Analysis. In Proceeding of the 44th IEEE International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (2011). Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Loosing "friends" on Facebook
Recommendations
Building social capital with Facebook: Type of network, availability of other media, and social self-efficacy matter#
Highlights- Type of friends affects building social capital via Facebook and traditional media.
AbstractFindings about Facebook's effect on relationships are mixed, possibly due to lack of models that acknowledge differences across users, types of their friends, and use of competing media. To address this, we proposed and tested how ...
Facebook friends, subjective well-being, social support, and personality
Offline social capital in the form of interpersonal networks is known to be associated with subjective well-being (SWB). In two studies run in the US (N = 153) and Germany (N = 187), we initially investigated whether the size of an individual's Facebook ...
Personality and social characteristics of Facebook non-users and frequent users
Facebook is currently the largest social networking website with an estimated one billion of monthly active users in 2012. While most of the prior research has explored characteristics of Facebook users, less is known about the characteristics of ...
Comments