Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Journal Article 1: Tsay-Vogel, M., Shanahan, J., & Signorielli, N. (2016). Social media cultivating perceptions of privacy: A 5-year analysis of privacy attitudes and self-disclosure behaviors among Facebook users. New Media & Society, 20, 141–161.

Abstract: In light of the omnipresence of personal information exchange in the virtual world, this study examines the effects of Facebook use on privacy perceptions and self-disclosure behaviors across a 5-year period from 2010 to 2015. Findings at the global level support the socializing role of Facebook in cultivating more relaxed privacy attitudes, subsequently increasing self-disclosure in both offline and online contexts. However, longitudinal trends indicate that while risk perceptions increased for heavy users, they remained stable for light users. Furthermore, the negative relationship between privacy concerns and self-disclosure weakened across time. Implications for the application of cultivation theory to a contemporary social media context and the year-to-year changes in the impact of Facebook use on privacy attitudes and self-disclosure are discussed.

Journal Article 2: Liang, H., Shen, F., & King-wa, F. (2016). Privacy protection and self-disclosure across societies: A study of global Twitter users. New Media & Society, 19, 1476–1497.

Abstract: Privacy is a culturally specific phenomenon. As social media platforms are going global, questions concerning privacy practices in a cross-cultural context become increasingly important. The purpose of this study is to examine cultural variations of privacy settings and self-disclosure of geolocation on Twitter. We randomly selected 3.3 million Twitter accounts from more than 100 societies. Results revealed considerable cultural and societal differences. Privacy setting in collectivistic societies was more effective in encouraging self-disclosure; whereas it appeared to be less important for users in individualistic societies. Internet penetration was also a significant factor in predicting both the adoption of privacy setting and geolocation self-disclosure. However, we did not find any direct relationships between cultural values and self-disclosure.

Journal Article 3: Heinz, M. (2018). Communicating while transgender: Apprehension, loneliness, and willingness to communicate in a Canadian sample. SAGE Open, 8.

Abstract: This mixed-methods study draws on quantitative and qualitative data on interpersonal communication measures and experiences of Canadian transgender people under the framework of Meyer’s minority stress model. Based on administration of three surveys (Willingness to Communicate; Personal Report of Communication Apprehension; and University of California, Los Angeles [UCLA] Loneliness scales), the participants in this study rated higher on communication apprehension and loneliness and were less willing to communicate than broader population means. The 44 participants identified key communication stressors in interactions with cisgender individuals and generated recommendations to facilitate less stressful communication climates. Communication climate, social isolation, and cisnormativity emerged as fundamental themes affecting interpersonal communication dynamics.

Journal Article 4: Hedman, U. (2016). When journalists tweet: Disclosure, participatory, and personal transparency. Social Media & Society, 2.

Abstract: This article analyses transparency among groups of journalists by examining journalists’ tweets. It also answers a call from previous researchers on transparency on Twitter for further studies based on more representative samples of journalists. The study draws on a quantitative content analysis of Swedish journalists’ tweets during 1 week in spring 2014. The total number of tweets analyzed (N) is 1,500. A total of 24% of the journalists’ tweets can be described as being explicitly transparent. However, the findings indicate that while journalists on Twitter indeed discuss how the news are produced (disclosure transparency), they show less personal transparency, and hardly ever invite the audiences to interact or take part in the process of making news (participatory transparency).