skip to main content
10.1145/2531602.2531685acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescscwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Creepy but inevitable?: the evolution of social networking

Published:15 February 2014Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper focuses on the fifth year of a cross-sectional trend study of enterprise social networking. Several stable patterns are evident--some activities have plateaued, others steadily increase in frequency. The fifth year did see a new development: As social networking companies visibly embraced behavior tracking and targeted advertising, concerns shifted from boundary regulation within personal networks to unsettling evidence of activity monitoring. However, benefits of use continue to outweigh drawbacks.

References

  1. Archambault, A. & Grudin, J. 2012. A longitudinal study of Facebook, LinkedIn, & Twitter use. Proc. CHI 2012, 2741--2750. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. boyd, d. 2008. Taken out of context: American teen sociality in networked publics. PhD Dissertation, University of California-Berkeley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Boyles, J.L., Smith, A. & Madden, M. 2012. Privacy and data management on mobile devices. Pew Internet. http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Mobile-Privacy.aspxGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Brzozowski, M.J., Sandholm, T. & Hogg, T. 2009. Effects of feedback and peer pressure on contributions to enterprise social media. Proc. GROUP 2009, 61--70. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Burke, M. & Kraut, R. 2013. Using facebook after losing a job: Differential benefits of strong and weak ties. Proc. CSCW 2013, 1419--1430. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Burke, M., Kraut, R. & Marlow, C. 2011. Social capital on Facebook: Differentiating uses and users. Proc. CHI 2011, 571--580. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Constine, J. 2012. Facebook beta launches new mobile ad network using your data to target you with banner ads in other apps. TechCrunch, September 18th. http://techcrunch.com/2012/09/18/facebook-mobile-ad-network/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. DiMicco, J., Geyer, W., Millen, D.R., Dugan, C. & Brownholtz, B. 2009. People sensemaking and relationship building on an enterprise social networking site. Proc. HICSS 2009. IEEE. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. DiMicco, J.M. & Millen, D.R. 2007. Identity management: Multiple presentations of self in Facebook. Proc. Group 2007, 383--386. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. DiMicco, J., Millen, D.R., Geyer, W., Dugan, C., Brownholtz, B. & Muller, M. 2008. Motivations for social networking at work. Proc. CSCW 2008. 711--720. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Efimova, L. & Grudin, J. 2007. Crossing boundaries: A case study of employee blogging. Proc. HICSS'07. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Ehrlich, K. & Shami, N. S. 2010. Microblogging inside and outside the workplace. Proc. ICWSM 2010. AAAI.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Ellison, N., Vitak, J., Steinfield, C., Gray, R., & Lampe, C. 2011. Negotiating privacy concerns and social capital needs in a social media environment. In S. Trepte and L. Reinecke (Eds.), Privacy online, 19--32. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Facebook Inc. 2013. First Quarter 2013 Results. http://investor.fb.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=761090Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Farnham, S. & Churchill, E. 2011. Faceted identity, faceted lives: Social and technical issues with being yourself online. Proc. CSCW 2012, 359--368. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Farzan, R., DiMicco, J.M., Millen, D.R., Brownholtz, B., Geyer, W. & Dugan, C. 2008. Results from deploying a participation incentive mechanism within the enterprise. Proc. CHI 2008, 563--572. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Fogel, J. & Nemad, E. 2009. Internet social network communities: Risk taking, trust, and privacy concerns. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 1, 153--160. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Geyer, W., Dugan, C., Brownholtz, B., Masli, M., Daly, E. & Millen, D.R. 2011. An open, social microcalendar for the enterprise: Timely Proc. CHI 2011, 247--256. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Geyer, W., Dugan, C., DiMicco, J., Millen, D.R., Brownholtz, B. & Muller, M. 2008. Use and reuse of shared lists as a social content type. Proc. CHI 2008, 1545--1554. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Good, N., Dhamija, R., Grossklags, J., Thaw, D., Aronowitz, S., Mulligan, D. & Konstan, J. 2005. Stopping spyware at the gate: A user study of privacy, notice, and spyware. Proc. SOUPS 2005, 43--53. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Hargittai, E. 2007. Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 1, article 14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Hogan, B. 2010. The presentation of self in the age of social media: Distinguishing performances and exhibitions online. Sci Technol Soc, 30, 377--386.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Kairam, S., Brzozowski, M., Huffaker, D. & Chi. E. 2012. Talking in circles: Selective sharing in Google+. Proc. CHI 2012, 1065--1074. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Lampe, C., Ellison, N. & Steinfield. 2006. A Face(book) in the crowd: Social searching vs. social browsing. Proc. CSCW 2006, 167--170. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Lampe, C., Ellison, N. & Steinfield. 2008. Changes in use and perception of Facebook. Proc. CSCW 2008, 721--730. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Lampe, C., Vitak, J., Gray, R. & Ellison, N. 2012. Perceptions of facebook's value as an information source. Proc. CHI 2012, 3195--3204. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Laporte, N. 2013. Why TV execs are still skeptical of Twitter's power to attract eyeballs. Fast Company. http://www.fastcompany.com/3019669/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Lin, J., Amini, S., Hong, J.I., Sadeh, N., Lindqvist, J. & Zhang, J. 2012. Expectation and purpose: understanding users' mental models of mobile app privacy through crowdsourcing. Proc. Ubicomp 2012, 501--510. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Miles, M. B. & Huberman. A. M. 1999. Qualitative data analysis. New York: Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Naaman, M., Boase, J. & Lai, C.H. 2010. Is it really all about me? Message content in social awareness streams. Proc. CSCW 2010, 189--192. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Page, X., Kobsa, A. & Knijnenburg, B.P. 2012. Don't disturb my circles! Boundary preservation is at the center of location-sharing concerns. Proc. ICWSM 2012, 266--273. AAAI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Raynes-Goldie, K. 2010. Aliases, creeping, and wall cleaning: Understanding privacy in the age of Facebook. First Monday, 15, 1.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Rooksby, J. & Sommerville, I. 2012. The management and use of social network sites in a government Dept.. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 21, 4--5, 397--415. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Skeels, M. & Grudin, J. 2009. When social networks cross boundaries: A case study of workplace use of Facebook and LinkedIn. Proc. Group 2009, 95--104. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Smith, A. & Brenner, J. 2012. Twitter use 2012. Pew Internet. http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/TwitterUse-2012/Findings.aspxGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Steinfield, C., DiMicco, J.M., Ellison, N.B. & Lampe, C. 2009. Bowling online: Social networking and social capital within the organization. Proc. Communities and Technology 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Stutzman, F. & Hartzog, W. 2012. Boundary regulation in social media. Proc. CSCW 2012, 769--778. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Thom, J. & Millen. D.R. 2012. Stuff IBMers say: Microblogs as an expression of organizational culture. Proc. ICWSM 2012. AAAI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Thom-Santelli, J. & Millen, D. 2009. Learning by seeing: Photo-viewing in the workplace. Proc. CHI 2009, 2081--2090. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Treem, J. & Leonardi, P. 2012. Social media use in organizations: Exploring the affordances of visibility, editability, persistence, and association. Communication yearbook, 36, 143--189.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Tufekci, Z. 2012. Youth and privacy in public networks. Proc. ICWSM 2012, 338--345. AAAI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Turner, T., Qvarfordt, P., Biehl, J.Y., Golovchinsky, G., & Back, M. 2010. Exploring the workplace communication ecology. Proc. CHI 2010, 841--850. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Voida, A., Harmon, E. & Al-Ani, B. 2012. Bridging between organizations and the public: Volunteer coordinators' uneasy relationship with social computing. Proc. CHI 2012, 1967--1976. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Wang, Y. & Kobsa, A. 2009. Privacy in online social networking at the workplace. Proc. CSE 2009, 975--978. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Wang, Y., Norcie, G., Komandura, S., Acquisti, A. Leon, P.G. & Cranor, L. 2011. "I regretted the minute I pressed share": A qualitative study of regrets on Facebook. Proc. SOUPS 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Wilson, R. E., Gosling, S. D. & Graham, L. T. 2012. A review of Facebook research in the social sciences. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 3, 203--220.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Woelfer, J. & Hendry, D. 2012. Homeless young people on social network sites. Proc. CHI 2012. 2825--2834. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Wu, A., DiMicco, J. & Millen, D.R. 2010. Detecting professional versus personal closeness using an enterprise social network site. Proc. CHI 2010, 1955--1964. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Zhang, J., Qu, Y., Cody, J. & Wu, Y. 2010. A case study of micro-blogging in the enterprise: Use, value, and related issues. Proc. CHI 2010, 123--132. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Zhao, D. & Rosson, M.B. 2009. How and why people Twitter: The role that micro-blogging plays in informal communication at work. Proc. GROUP 2009, 243--252. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Creepy but inevitable?: the evolution of social networking

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CSCW '14: Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing
      February 2014
      1600 pages
      ISBN:9781450325400
      DOI:10.1145/2531602

      Copyright © 2014 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 15 February 2014

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CSCW '14 Paper Acceptance Rate134of497submissions,27%Overall Acceptance Rate2,235of8,521submissions,26%

      Upcoming Conference

      CSCW '24

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader