Abstract The prevalence of social network sites – Savvy Essay Writers | savvyessaywriters.net
Abstract The prevalence of social network sites – Savvy Essay Writers | savvyessaywriters.net
new media & society 2017, Vol. 19(2) 308 –326
© The Author(s) 2016 Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1461444816671891
journals.sagepub.com/home/nms
Explicating problematic social network sites use: A review of concepts, theoretical frameworks, and future directions for communication theorizing
Edmund W J Lee, Shirley S Ho and May O Lwin Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Abstract The prevalence of social network sites (SNSs) has sparked a growing interest in understanding the development of problematic SNSs use among adolescents. Yet, this nascent area of research is marked by some deficiencies in existing theoretical paradigms. This article seeks to review the state of research in problematic SNSs use— broadly with a specific focus on adolescents—and identify key areas of research for future scholarly work. First, we summarize the historical and recent developments of media addiction and problematic SNSs use research. Second, we discuss the theoretical perspectives that contribute to our understanding of the problematic SNSs use phenomenon and identify the weaknesses of these frameworks. Third, we propose that communication scholars should strive for theoretical integration and examine the impact of microsystem (e.g. parents and peers) and macrosystem (e.g. surveillance culture) on the development of problematic SNSs among adolescents. Directions for future theoretical and methodological approaches are suggested.
Keywords Adolescents, macrosystem, media addiction, microsystem, peers, problematic use, social network, social network sites (SNSs), surveillance culture
Corresponding author: Edmund W J Lee, Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information, Nanyang Technological University, 31 Nanyang Link, 637718 Singapore. Email: elwj88@gmail.com
671891 NMS0010.1177/1461444816671891new media & societyLee et al. research-article2016
Article
https://journals.sagepub.com/home/nms
mailto:elwj88@gmail.com
http://sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav]
http://DOI: 10.1177/1461444816671891
http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1177%2F1461444816671891&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2016-10-06
Lee et al. 309
The phenomenal growth of social network sites (SNSs) has captured a considerable amount of attention from the academic community in recent years. Particularly, the potential of SNSs to elicit addictive tendencies, or problematic SNSs use, has attracted much scholarly interest. Research has shown that the estimates of problematic SNSs use ranged from a low of 1.6% to a high of 34% in various study populations (Griffiths and Kuss, 2015), and this figure is likely to increase based on the upward trend in SNSs adop- tion—the number of Internet users who use SNSs increased fivefold from 2006 to 2015 (Perrin, 2015). As the problem is more pronounced among adolescents (Meena et al., 2012), it illustrates the importance of this topic for teenagers. Adolescents are at a higher risk of developing problematic SNSs use as they are the most frequent users of SNSs, and the proliferation of smartphone ownership among the young make it very convenient for them to access SNSs (Griffiths et al., 2014; Lauricella et al., 2014). Moreover, it is at the stage of adolescence where teenagers display the highest level of difficulty in behav- ioral and emotional regulation (e.g. Prencipe et al., 2011). With the ease of accessibility to SNSs, it is reasonable to postulate that the incidence of problematic SNSs use may increase gradually, even though like most behavioral addiction, it is ultimately a problem that only affects the minority (Sussman et al., 2011).
As such, it is important to unpack problematic SNSs use theoretically for future research. While our subsequent discussion aims to examine the topic broadly, we will keep a specific focus on adolescents, as they are the most susceptible to problematic SNSs use. The purpose of this article is fourfold. First, we highlight some of the chal- lenges faced by researchers involved in problematic SNSs use research, followed by a brief explication of problematic SNSs use. Next, we review the general theoretical para- digms that could guide research in problematic SNSs use. Third, we propose that future research directions should strive for theoretical integration and examine the impact of microsystem (e.g. parents and peers) and macrosystem (e.g. surveillance culture) on adolescents’ development of problematic SNSs use. Last but not least, we also suggest that future works should incorporate a network perspective to understand the phenom- enon and to extend existing communication theories by accounting for the synergistic influence of both external- and individual-level constructs on adolescents’ problematic SNSs use.
Challenges to research in problematic SNSs use
While problematic SNSs use is a relatively nascent research area, there is a surge in the number of publications and debate about this phenomenon in recent years (e.g. Andreassen et al., 2012; Kittinger et al., 2012; Meena et al., 2012). Even with the bur- geoning scholarship, there are challenges to research in problematic SNSs use due to unaddressed theoretical and methodological shortfalls. Unfortunately, instead of provid- ing clarity, the quantitative increase in research has produced some unwanted conse- quences. One of such is exacerbating the existing fragmentation in the field instead of achieving the intended conceptual convergence. Specifically, there are three distinct issues facing researchers involved in problematic SNSs use research.
First, one of the unresolved issues is the confusion over conceptualization—what do scholars actually mean by problematic SNSs use? For instance, problematic media use is
310 new media & society 19(2)
used synonymously with terms such as dependency, addiction, and pathological usage (Andreassen et al., 2012; LaRose et al., 2003). Scholars need to understand the qualita- tive differences among the terms and use them discriminately.
The second challenge is identifying and applying theoretical frameworks appropri- ately to examine problematic SNSs use. There are many theoretical frameworks in psy- chology, communication, and neurobiological or psychophysiological studies that scholars could adopt to examine problematic SNSs use. For instance, some have exam- ined it through the theoretical lenses of personality types (Caci et al., 2014; Ross et al., 2009; Skues et al., 2012), while others have argued that problematic SNSs use should be interpreted through the social cognitive lens (e.g. LaRose et al., 2010). Scholars have also proposed applying theories such as the theory of planned behavior or Caplan’s prob- lematic Internet use to the context of SNSs use (Baker and White, 2010; LaRose et al., 2010; Pelling and White, 2009).
While each of these theoretical frameworks bring their unique contributions, few have presented a systematic defense of the chosen theoretical framework and demonstrate how their works contribute to the overall development of communication theorizing. Without addressing the why questions, the quantitative increase in the research will merely add to the creation of isolated academic frog ponds (Rosengren, 1993), while taking very little stride in the development of communication theory.
The third issue is that the existing theoretical frameworks seem to over-emphasize individual-level constructs while ignoring how external environmental factors could contribute to the development of unhealthy SNSs usage. While psychological theories focusing on individual-level factors do partially explain why some exhibit uncontrolla- bility in their SNSs use, a large body of research has also identified external factors such as parents or peers’ influence—the ecological systems one is embedded in—as important contributors to the development of addictive tendencies (Santrock, 2007, 2008).
Addiction, dependency, or problematic use?
There are a variety of terms used for addictive tendencies to media (LaRose et al., 2003). For instance, scholars have used terms such as addiction (Alabi, 2013; Koc and Gulyagci, 2013; Young, 2004), dependency (Lu, 2008; Peng and Liu, 2010), and problematic use (Caplan, 2002, 2010; Caplan and High, 2012) to describe individuals’ uncontrollable urge to use media.
Addiction is a compulsive and unhealthy dependence on a habit or substance that has negative physical or psychological repercussions (Byun et al., 2009). Despite having a longstanding academic tradition, the term addiction remains highly contentious, result- ing in much division in the scholarly community. The usage of the word initially fell out of favor with professional academic societies such as the American Psychiatric Association (APA), which replaced it with the preferred term dependence in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) (LaRose et al., 2003). Media addiction was not recognized as an official disorder as issues such as etiology, comorbidity (e.g. Ho et al., 2014), and treatment were not clearly accounted for, and it raises false alarm to seek treatment when there is none (LaRose et al., 2003).
Lee et al. 311
The preference for dependence as a descriptive label was short-lived. Even though dependence was less loaded than addiction, it did not gain widespread acceptance. In the latest DSM-5, scholars recognized that the word dependence had caused much confusion instead of achieving conceptual clarity. As such, dependency was eventually replaced by substance use disorder in the description of addictive tendencies related to substance use while addictive disorder was used to describe behavioral addictions (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013).
Problematic use as the preferred term
In recent years, the use of the term problematic use has become popular with Internet researchers (Yellowlees and Marks, 2007). Many scholars prefer this concept because compared to terms like addiction or dependency, it does not…
