TIA066 Communication Technology Assignment 2 Understanding University Students' Preferences for Facebook Messenger vs. WhatsApp: An
Application of the Technology Acceptance Model
1
Table of Content
Abstract
Introduction
Literature review
Instant messaging apps
The Technology Acceptance Model
Methods
Data Analysis
Analysis
Functionalities
Peer Influence
Privacy and Security
Prior Experiences
Platform Accessibility
Conclusions
References
Appendix
Interview Guide
Consent Form and information sheet
One interview Transcript (n. 4)
3
4
5
5
6
7
8
8
9
9
9
10
10
11
13
16
16
17
18
2
Abstract
This study delves into understanding the factors influencing university students' preferences between
Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp for interpersonal communication. Anchored on the Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM), the study explores these platforms' perceived usefulness and ease of use, along
with social influence and cognitive instrumental processes, as introduced in the TAM2 model. A thematic
analysis was conducted on the qualitative data collected from six semi-structured interviews with university
students aged 18 to 24.
Results indicated that most students used both Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp but had distinct
preferences influenced by multiple factors. Perceived usefulness was identified as a dominant theme across
all interviews, with students highlighting the varied features of each platform that enhanced their
communication. Perceived ease of use was also significant, with students favoring the platform they found
more intuitive and straightforward to use.
The social influence process was also evident, with students' platform preferences influenced by their social
circles. A unique theme emerged regarding students' use of the platforms for different purposes – Facebook
Messenger for casual, social interactions, and WhatsApp for more formal, academic ones.
This study contributes to the existing literature by offering insights into the factors influencing students'
choice of instant messaging platforms, with a specific comparison between Facebook Messenger and
WhatsApp. Findings reinforce the applicability of TAM in understanding technology acceptance and
highlight the need to consider individual and contextual factors in studying technology adoption. Future
research should focus on a larger, more diverse sample to validate and extend these findings.
3
Introduction
Research on the adoption and usage patterns of digital communication platforms has been extensive, with
studies highlighting many influencing factors (OECD Digital Economy Outlook, 2020). The ease of use and
accessibility of these platforms have emerged as key drivers of their widespread adoption. They offer an
immediate, efficient way of communicating, especially valued by university students who must balance their
academic obligations with maintaining their social connections. Furthermore, the multimedia capabilities of
these platforms, such as the ability to share images, videos, and even documents, have also contributed to their
appeal (Zacharis et al., 2022).
In today's digital communication era, Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp are two leading platforms with
their distinctive features influencing user preferences. Facebook Messenger appeals to those who value a
comprehensive platform, due to its integration with a broader ecosystem. On the other hand, WhatsApp is
lauded for its simplicity and robust privacy protections, with end-to-end encryption being a prominent
strength (Midas et al., 2017; Esayas, 2017). In this bustling digital landscape, two applications, Facebook
Messenger and WhatsApp, have emerged as the dominant players (Statista, 2023). These platforms offer
similar features, encompassing text, voice, video messaging, and file-sharing capabilities. However,
individual preferences often seem to lean towards one over the other, prompting questions about the driving
forces behind these tendencies. A range of studies have aimed to understand this phenomenon, investigating
the usage patterns, user satisfaction, and specific features that influence preferences (Sponsil & Gitimu, 2013;
Zarouali et al., 2021). For instance, Sponsil & Gitimu found that ease of use and the perceived usefulness of
unique features played a significant role in platform choice, while Zarouali et al. (2021) observed that data
privacy concerns influenced a shift towards WhatsApp.
This study ventures into this digital terrain with the primary aim of exploring these preferences. More
specifically, the focus will be on university students' use of Facebook Messenger versus WhatsApp for
maintaining interpersonal communications. Guiding our exploration is the Technology Acceptance Model
(TAM) (Davis, 1989), a theoretical framework suggesting that perceived usefulness and ease of use are the
primary factors influencing an individual's acceptance and use of technology. Applying the TAM to our study
aims to uncover the underlying factors that might tilt a student's preference towards one application over the
other (Ursavaş, 2022). The research question of this investigation is the following:
"What are the driving factors influencing a university student's choice between Facebook Messenger and
WhatsApp for interpersonal communication?".
The primary tool for this exploration is a qualitative research approach involving semi-structured interviews
with 6 university students. This methodology allows for an in-depth exploration of the students' experiences
and perceptions, offering rich data to make us better understand the phenomenon. By examining students'
4
preferences between Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp through the lens of TAM, this study aspires to
contribute to the broader understanding of digital communication platform usage.
Literature review
Instant messaging apps
Instant messaging apps have become integral to our daily lives, drastically altering how we communicate,
both personally and professionally. As per Statista (2023), over three billion people worldwide use these
apps, a testament to their widespread acceptance.
The evolution of these apps can be traced back to the 1990s when AOL introduced Instant Messenger, which
is considered a pioneer in this space (Carr & Hayes, 2015). Over time, the landscape has evolved significantly,
with apps like Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, and WeChat dominating the current market.
Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp, both owned by Meta Platforms, together boast billions of users, largely
due to their user-friendly interfaces and feature-rich platforms. Being integrated with the Facebook ecosystem,
Messenger leverages this vast network for seamless communication (Isaac, 2019). On the other hand,
WhatsApp is favoured for its simplicity and strong emphasis on privacy with end-to-end encryption
(Greenberg, 2016).
Beyond personal communication, instant messaging apps have demonstrated significant utility in various
professional and educational contexts. Within the professional sphere, the role of these apps extends beyond
simple communication; they have been identified as tools that foster an environment conducive to real-time
collaboration and positive interpersonal relations. Cameron & Webster (2005) conducted a comprehensive
study, concluding that the real-time functionality of instant messaging apps enhances workplace
communication. Additionally, they found that the informal nature of these applications aids in fostering
positive employee relationships by breaking down communication barriers and encouraging open dialogue.
In education, these apps have also found a considerable place. Chen & Denoyelles (2013) suggest that teachers
and students frequently use them to share information and facilitate discussions. In this capacity, instant
messaging apps provide a convenient communication tool and an effective platform for enhancing
collaborative learning experiences. They have been used in various scenarios, from information sharing to
facilitating group projects, enhancing the overall learning experience. These instances highlight the
transformative potential of instant messaging apps in both professional and educational contexts, changing the
way we view communication in these sectors.
Despite these benefits, these apps pose some challenges as well. Privacy is a primary concern with social
media platforms being scrutinised for their data handling practices (Cheung et al., 2015). Cyberbullying is
5
another issue, especially among young users, requiring consistent monitoring and strong protective measures
(Hinduja & Patchin, 2010).
The future of instant messaging apps is pivoting towards continuous innovation. As Gartner (2019)
outlined, emerging trends suggest an increased integration of artificial intelligence, such as smart replies
and chatbots, for more effective and streamlined communication. The advent of immersive technologies
like virtual and augmented reality, also mentioned in Gartner's report, could hint at their potential
incorporation into instant messaging for more interactive and engaging communication experiences.
Furthermore, as privacy concerns increase, future iterations of these apps will likely focus on enhanced
security measures.
In summary, instant messaging apps have transformed how we communicate, bringing many benefits
and some challenges. They promise to reshape our communication paradigms in personal and
professional spheres as they continue to evolve.
The Technology Acceptance Model
The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), proposed by Davis in 1989, has been a seminal framework in
understanding technology adoption. The model emphasises two core factors: perceived usefulness, which is
the degree to which a user believes that using a system would enhance their job performance, and perceived
ease of use, which refers to the extent a person believes using a system would be free of effort (Davis, 1989).
TAM has been widely validated and adapted across a variety of studies and contexts. For example, Venkatesh
and Thong (2012) applied the model in the context of workplace technologies, revealing that employee
adoption was indeed influenced by perceived usefulness and ease of use. Similarly, Bagozzi
(2007)
implemented the TAM framework in studying educational tools, finding consistent evidence supporting the
model's predictions.
The model has also seen several extensions and modifications to account for additional influencing factors.
Venkatesh and Davis (2000) extended the original TAM to the TAM2 model, introducing social influence
processes and cognitive instrumental processes as additional determinants of perceived usefulness. Further,
Venkatesh et al. (2016) proposed the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT),
which integrates elements from various acceptance models, including TAM.
TAM has been specifically applied to studies of instant messaging apps as well. For instance, Zhang et al.
(2017) employed TAM to understand user adoption of WeChat, a popular messaging app. The study found
that perceived usefulness and ease of use significantly influenced user adoption, echoing TAM's primary
assertions.
Critiques of TAM often focus on its simplicity, with some scholars arguing that technology adoption and
6
usage is a complex process influenced by a range of personal, social, and contextual factors that the model
does not adequately account for (Bagozzi, 2007). Nevertheless, the model's simplicity has been deemed a
strength by others, as it allows for clear, testable hypotheses (Granić, 2022).
In conclusion, the Technology Acceptance Model has been a crucial theoretical tool for understanding
technology acceptance and use and has been applied in numerous contexts, including instant messaging
apps. While the model is not without its critics, it has shown considerable robustness and adaptability,
making it a valuable tool for examining the factors influencing the adoption and use of technologies.
Methods
This study employs a qualitative research design to better understand the experiences and behaviours of
university students in using Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp to maintain contact with friends and family.
Qualitative research, rooted in the interpretive paradigm, is beneficial for exploring social realities as they are
constructed and experienced by individuals (Creswell & Poth, 2016).
The participant selection process will follow the principles of convenience and purposive sampling (Creswell
& Poth, 2016), focusing on university students who use either or both Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp.
This population is an ideal fit for this study due to their likely heavy reliance on digital communication
platforms to maintain social connections.
Participants for the study were selected based on specific sampling criteria: university students aged between
18 and 24 who are active users of both Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp. The sample was conveniently
selected from a student housing complex in Gothenburg, resulting in 6 participants. This sample size is
appropriate for qualitative research, prioritising depth and detail over breadth.
Data collection was achieved through semi-structured interviews, which allowed participants to express their
experiences and perspectives freely (Creswell & Poth, 2016). An interview guide (see Appendix 1) was used
to structure these conversations. Interviews, each lasting 20 minutes, were conducted face-to-face and, with
participant consent, were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim for analysis. The semi-structured
interviews were structured around open-ended questions, creating a conversational space encouraging
participants to share detailed insights about their usage patterns, preferences, and experiences with both
platforms. These detailed narratives will comprehensively understand the factors influencing the students'
choices.
Data Analysis
Data analysis was conducted through a rigorous process of thematic analysis, a qualitative analytic method
7
that involves identifying, analysing, and interpreting patterns of meaning (or "themes") within textual data
(Braun & Clarke, 2006). The process followed the six steps as proposed by Braun and Clarke: familiarisation
with the data, generating initial codes, searching for themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming themes,
and producing the report.
The first step involved careful reading and re-reading of the interview transcripts to become thoroughly
familiar with the data. Following this, initial codes were generated. Coding is the process of marking sections
of data that appear meaningful or interesting in the context of the research question. This was carried out
inductively, meaning that codes emerged directly from the data rather than being pre-determined by existing
theory.
After coding the entire data set, the next step was to search for themes. This entailed reviewing and grouping
the coded data extracts based on their similarities and differences to form overarching themes and subthemes.
The themes were constantly reviewed and refined at this stage to ensure they accurately represented the coded
data.
Once the themes were identified, they were defined and named to capture their essence. They were then
analysed and interpreted in relation to the Technology Acceptance Model and Media Richness Theory. This
theoretical framework allowed for a nuanced understanding of the users' experiences and behaviours and the
factors that influenced their choice between Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp.
Finally, excerpts from the transcripts were selected to illustrate the themes in the findings section of this
report. This process ensures the study's credibility by grounding the findings in the data. It is important to
note that while this study provides valuable insights into university students' preferences and uses of
Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp, the findings are not intended to be generalised to all university
students or to all users of these platforms. This qualitative research aims not to make broad generalisations
but to gain a deeper understanding of a particular phenomenon in a specific context.
Analysis
After conducting in-depth interviews with six university students, five main themes emerged that influenced
the choice between Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp for interpersonal communication: Functionalities,
Peer Influence, Privacy & Security, Prior Experiences, and Platform Accessibility.
Functionalities
The functionalities of each application played a critical role in the students' preferences, echoing Carr &
Hayes' (2015) assertion about the impact of user-friendly interfaces and feature-rich platforms on users'
choices. Students often highlighted specific features they found beneficial for their communication needs.
Interviewee 1 illustrated this point: "I prefer using WhatsApp because it allows me to easily share files and
images. Also the group chat feature is more useful when organising study sessions." This preference
8
underscores the importance of the platform's capabilities that aid in academic collaboration. In contrast,
Interviewee 6 added, "But for things like group projects or when I need to share some files, I prefer
Messenger." Despite the similarities between the two apps, it was clear that specific features resonated
differently with individual users.
Peer Influence
Peer influence emerged as a significant theme in students' platform choices. This finding is in line with the
extended TAM model (TAM2) proposed by Venkatesh and Davis (2000), which incorporated social influence
processes as key determinants of technology acceptance. The importance of peer influence was candidly
discussed by Interviewee 3, who said, "Most of my friends are on Facebook, so I tend to use Messenger more
often." This statement exemplifies how the popularity of a platform within a social circle can significantly
influence individual app preferences. Echoing this sentiment, Interviewee 5 mentioned, "All my contacts are
already on WhatsApp, so it’s easier for me to communicate with them there", reinforcing the idea that social
factors can significantly shape the platform choices.
Privacy and Security
Drawing attention to the mounting issues around privacy and security practices within social media platforms
(Cheung et al., 2015), privacy and data security emerged as crucial deciding factors affecting the choice of
applications. Interviewee 5 emphasised this aspect: "WhatsApp's simplicity appeals to me - it's straightforward
and secure." Their inclination towards what is perceived as an enhanced level of security signals the increasing
significance placed on privacy in an era where data breaches are distressingly commonplace. This sense of
security fosters a greater trust in the platform, facilitating more candid and open communication. Additionally,
Interviewee 6 asserted, "For personal chats, I prefer WhatsApp because it feels more private", thereby
shedding light on how privacy features can decisively impact user preferences. The notion of 'feeling private'
denotes a subjective comfort in interaction that indicates not only trust in the platform's security measures but
also the suitability of its design for intimate exchanges. The value users place on such features is clear - they
require a sense of security and privacy to interact and share freely, an essential requirement for any
communication platform.
Prior Experiences
Building upon Davis's (1989) theory, the study highlighted the significant role that previous experiences with
technology play in shaping a user's preferences. A prime example is provided by Interviewee 1, who switched
from Facebook Messenger to WhatsApp due to issues with undelivered messages. As the interviewee stated,
"I had issues with Messenger before, like messages not getting delivered, so I switched to WhatsApp," this
incident demonstrates how negative experiences can drive users to seek out alternative platforms.
Such experiences affect more than just immediate user satisfaction; they influence the user's trust in the
9
application's reliability, prompting a search for more reliable alternatives. This emphasises the importance of
the user's need for a reliable communication tool, illustrating how prior experiences can affect decisionmaking processes. Users prioritise applications that provide a consistent and efficient service, underscoring
the need for developers to focus on reliable functionality and innovative features. These findings serve to
further highlight the importance of past experiences in determining user preferences and app selection.
Platform Accessibility
Platform accessibility emerged as an important theme, aligning with Davis's TAM (1989), which considers
ease of use as a core factor in technology acceptance. Interviewee 4's comments highlighted this importance,
noting, "I use Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp on both my desktop and mobile. But for the desktop, it's
easier to use WhatsApp because you don't have to keep logging in and logging out." The ability to use a
platform across various devices with minimal inconvenience was perceived as a significant advantage,
enabling users to communicate effortlessly regardless of the device they have at hand.
In conclusion, the experiences of university students in using Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp highlight
an intricate interplay of factors influencing their app preferences. This analysis confirms the validity of TAM
in understanding user preferences but extends it by incorporating the influence of real-world experiences and
nuances. This study underscores the importance of platform functionalities, peer influence, privacy and
security, past experiences, and platform accessibility in shaping user preferences, providing rich insights for
future research and potential application development.
Conclusions
The mini-study presented herein sheds light on the factors that influence university students' preferences when
choosing between two prominent messaging apps: Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp. As gleaned from the
interviews, the students' choices were dictated by several interplaying factors, including app functionality, peer
influence, privacy and security features, and prior experiences with the apps.
In terms of functionality, the preferences of interviewees leaned towards the app that provided the most
efficient and satisfying user experience. Peer influence was also a significant factor, with some students
admitting to choosing an app predominantly used by their social circles, highlighting the importance of social
conformity in app usage. As for privacy and security, while WhatsApp's end-to-end encryption was noted,
there was a general lack of emphasis on these features, particularly from Interviewee 4, who admitted to not
considering privacy at all.
Finally, past experiences, both positive and negative, with the apps significantly shaped the students' choices.
An interesting example was Interviewee 1, who switched to WhatsApp due to previously encountered issues
10
with Facebook Messenger. This demonstrates how a single negative experience can lead users to explore
alternative platforms.
However, the study has some limitations that need to be considered. Firstly, it only presents a small number
of views, as only six students were interviewed. Hence, the results may not be representative of the wider
university student population, much less the general public. It also focused solely on Facebook Messenger
and WhatsApp, overlooking other popular messaging apps such as Snapchat, WeChat, or Telegram.
Secondly, the study didn't explore the effects of demographic factors like age, gender, or study field, which
might influence app preferences. For instance, older students or those studying in technical fields might have
different views on privacy and security than younger students or those in non-technical fields.
In light of these limitations, several directions for future research are proposed. Firstly, larger-scale studies
should be conducted to obtain a more representative understanding of user preferences. Including a broader
range of messaging apps in these studies could provide more comprehensive insights. Moreover, future
research could also delve into the role of demographic factors in shaping app preferences.
In conclusion, understanding user preferences and the factors that drive them is crucial for developers seeking
to enhance their messaging apps and for researchers seeking to understand how people interact with
technology. Although the findings of this study are preliminary, they provide a valuable starting point for
further exploration of this important topic.
11
References
- Bagozzi, R. P. (2007). The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a
paradigm shift. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 3.
- Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in
psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
- Cameron, A. F., & Webster, J. (2005). Unintended consequences of emerging communication
technologies: Instant messaging in the workplace. Computers in Human behavior, 21(1), 85-103.
- Carr, C. T., & Hayes, R. A. (2015). Social media: Defining, developing, and divining. Atlantic
journal of communication, 23(1), 46-65.
- Chen, B., & Denoyelles, A. (2013). Exploring students’ mobile learning practices in higher
education. Educause Review, 7(1), 36-43.
- Cheung, C., Lee, Z. W., & Chan, T. K. (2015). Self-disclosure in social networking sites: the
role of perceived cost, perceived benefits and social influence. Internet Research.
- Church, K., & De Oliveira, R. (2013, August). What's up with WhatsApp? Comparing mobile
instant messaging behaviors with traditional SMS. In Proceedings of the 15th international
conference on Human-computer interaction with mobile devices and services (pp. 352-361).
- Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing
among five approaches. Sage publications.
- Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of
information technology. MIS Quarterly, 319-340.
- Esayas, Samson, Competition in Dissimilarity: Lessons in Privacy From the
Facebook/WhatsApp Merger (September 19, 2017). University of Oslo Faculty of Law Research
Paper No. 2017-33.
- Granić, A. (2022). Educational technology adoption: a systematic review. Education and
Information Technologies, 27(7), 9725-9744.
- Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2010). Bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide. Archives of suicide
research, 14(3), 206-221.
- Isaac, M. (2019). Zuckerberg Plans to Integrate WhatsApp, Instagram and Facebook Messenger.
The New York Times. Retrieved from:
12
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/25/technology/facebook-instagram-whatsapp-messenger.html
- Greenberg, A. (2016). Forget Apple vs. the FBI: WhatsApp Just Switched on Encryption for a
Billion People. Wired. Retrieved from: https://www.wired.com/2016/04/forget-apple-vs-fbi
whatsapp-just-switched-encryption-billion-people/
- Midas Nouwens, Carla F. Griggio, and Wendy E. Mackay. 2017. "WhatsApp is for family;
Messenger is for friends": Communication Places in App Ecosystems. In Proceedings of
the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). Association
for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 727–735.
- Mittal, S., & Sharma, P. (2017). The role of consent in legitimising the processing of personal
data under the current EU data protection framework. Asian Journal of Computer Science And
Information Technology, 7(4), 76-78.
- OECD, Digital Economy Outlook, 2020. Retrieved from: https://www.oecd
ilibrary.org/sites/bb167041-en/index.html?itemId=/content/publication/bb167041en
- Sponcil, M., & Gitimu, P. (2013). Use of social media by college students: Relationship to
communication and self-concept. Journal of Technology Research, 4(1), 37-49.
- Statista. (2023). Most popular global mobile messenger apps as of January 2023, based on
number of monthly active users. Statista. Retrieved from
https://www.statista.com/statistics/258749/most-popular-global-mobile-messenger-apps/
- Ursavaş, Ö.F. (2022). Technology Acceptance Model: History, Theory, and Application. In:
Conducting Technology Acceptance Research in Education . Springer Texts in Education.
Springer, Cham.
- Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance
model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management science, 46(2), 186-204.
- Venkatesh, V., Thong, J., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information
technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly,
157-178.
- Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2016). Unified theory of acceptance and use of
technology: A synthesis and the road ahead. Journal of the association for Information
Systems, 17(5), 328-376.
13
- Zacharis, G., Nikolopoulou, K. Factors predicting University students’ behavioral intention to
use eLearning platforms in the post-pandemic normal: an UTAUT2 approach with ‘Learning
Value’. Educ Inf Technol 27, 12065–12082 (2022).
- Zarouali, B., Brosius, A., Helberger, N., & De Vreese, C. H. (2021). WhatsApp marketing: a
study on WhatsApp brand communication and the role of trust in self-disclosure. International
Journal of Communication, 15, 25.
- Zhang, M., Guo, L., Hu, M., & Liu, W. (2017). Influence of customer engagement with
company social networks on stickiness: Mediating effect of customer value
creation. International Journal of Information Management, 37(3), 229-240.
14
Appendix
Interview Guide
1. Which platform (Facebook Messenger or WhatsApp) do you primarily use to keep in touch with
family and friends, and why?
2. What specific features of your preferred platform enhance your communication with friends and
family?
3. Can you share any particular experiences that made you prefer one platform over the other?
4. Do you believe one platform is more effective than the other in maintaining your relationships? Why or
why not?
5. Are there any needs that aren't fulfilled by your preferred platform?
6. How does your academic environment influence your choice between Facebook Messenger and
WhatsApp? Are there academic-related features or functions that you find useful in one over the
other?
7. How does the privacy policy of each platform influence your decision to use them?
8. How does the 'seen' or 'read' receipt feature in Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp influence your
communication habits or preferences?
9. In what ways does the perceived ease of use of each platform influence your preference?
10. Does the functionality of these platforms in different devices (such as mobile or desktop) influence
your choice? Can you provide examples?
Consent Form and information sheet
15
Consent to Participate in Research
Understanding University Students' Preferences for Facebook Messenger vs. WhatsApp
You have been invited to take part in a study about Understanding University Students' Preferences for
Facebook Messenger vs. WhatsApp: An Application of the Technology Acceptance Model. This study is part
of a course project in the Master in Communication Programme at the University of Gothenburg, led by xxxx.
Study Purpose
The purpose of this study is to understand the factors that influence university students' choice between
Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp for interpersonal communication.
Voluntary Participation
Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. You have the right to withdraw from the study at any
time and without penalty. You have the option of refusing to answer any of the inquiries.
Procedures
You will be interviewed in a semi-structured manner. The interview will last approximately 20 minutes and
will be conducted in person. For the purpose of the study, the interviews will be audio recorded.
Confidentiality
Your identity will be kept private to the extent possible. Your name will be assigned a pseudonym instead of
any personally revealing information. The list of pseudonyms linked to your real identity, along with the audio
recordings, will be preserved in a secured file that only the researchers have access to.
The supervisors and academic personnel appointed to control the quality of the project will be the only
individuals who can require gaining access to the aforementioned file for academic research purposes only.
If you have any questions, please contact:
xxxx.xxxx@student.gu.se
Consent to participate in the research project:
I have read and understood the information about the study. I have been given the opportunity to ask
16
questions and have them addressed. I have the option of keeping the written information.
I consent to participate in the study as stated in the document.
I consent to the processing of my personal data for the study as indicated in the document.
I consent to my samples being saved in a secured file that only the researchers and the academic
personnel have access to as mentioned in the document.
I understand that I have the option to withdraw from the study at any point of time.
Date (Day/Month/Year) Signature of the Participant
One interview Transcript (n. 4)
Speaker 1
Okay, so I'm going to ask you 10 questions. And the first one will be which platform, Facebook Messenger
or WhatsApp, do you primarily use it to keep in touch with family and friends and why?
Speaker 2
I usually use WhatsApp, because from where I'm from in the UK, most people use WhatsApp and it's easier
to sort of access it and use it. And I think it's a faster way of communicating people compared to other social
media platforms and why is it easier because you don't have to log in every time you go into the app. So you
can access it quite easily and the notifications come up straight away on your phone. So it doesn't matter if
you're a friend. You don't have to be a friend with a person. You could just get their number and then you
can just message them and it's quite easy to find.
17
Speaker 1
Okay, make sense? Second question, what specific features of your preferred platform, assuming WhatsApp,
enhance your communication with friends and family?
Speaker 2
I like the use of the video call and the phone call because it's, it means that you can speak to them directly.
You don't have to wait for them to read the message. I also like the new system. Where you can react to the
messages. So if you don't have the time to write a message reply, you can do a quick reaction and then they
know what you're thinking. I also like the location so you can share your location with them. So that means
13
that it's easy. You don't have to find someone in there, someone they could just come to the place where
you're at. I also like the fact that you could easily set up groups on WhatsApp so you can talk with a lot of
people at any one time. And then I'm pretty sure they have systems where you can set up groups and every
group admins message and call it's quite dynamic. So you can you can have it for every different situation.
Speaker 1
Yeah. And can you share any particular experiences that make you prefer one platform over the other talking
about WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger?
Speaker 2
Okay, so when I when I came to Gothenburg on my exchange, I, there was a lot of people who were contacting
me to, actually not when I came here when I'm leaving, and I was selling some of my items. A lot of people
were contacting me to make offers for like items. I was selling. And the fact that in WhatsApp people who
aren't your friends or you don't know before can easily contact you. And then you can see the message is good
on Facebook because a lot of people were contacting me went already my friends. So when they messaged
me on Messenger, it doesn't come up directly. It goes to some sort of other feed with friends requests, so it's
just a bit difficult to receive the messages and see them from people that you don't know.
Speaker 1
And do you believe that one platform is more effective than the other in maintaining your relationships?
Speaker 2
18
In terms of maintaining relationships, I would say Facebook Messenger is better than WhatsApp in certain
ways, because it's tied to the fact that you're also like friends, you can see their pictures and you get to see
what they're doing in their life. So it's not just the messaging, messaging mechanisms, it's all the other things
that Facebook offers. But in terms of ease of access and accessibility, I think WhatsApp is definitely better.
Speaker 1
Yeah, are there any needs that aren't fulfilled by your preferred platform? Like features, something that you
think it's missing from WhatsApp?
Speaker 2
So, my I have a cousin who's blind and there isn't any any specific way of people without sight being able to
use WhatsApp. Yeah, that's all I can think of. Yeah. So it's not it's not for people with disabilities. It's not the
most accessible. Well, obviously, you can still see it if you are deaf, but if people are blind. It's not really that.
Speaker 1
I was thinking about like sending messages.
14
Speaker 2
But you still have to see where to click, and maybe they could have some sort of tutorial where you can
where you can, like, speak to your phone and say, I want to do this. Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1
Okay, so next question. How does your academic environment influence your choice between Facebook
Messenger and WhatsApp? And if there are any academic-related features or functions that you can find
useful in one overloaded? I don't know sharing files,
Speaker 2
Per se in terms of academic setting depends on the country in the UK. It's more Whatsapp and Facebook. In
Sweden is more Facebook and WhatsApp. Both are really good at sharing files and documents. But I would
say WhatsApp is, in my opinion, better for the academic setting, because you don't have to share your personal
details and your personal page. If you're on your Facebook page, you're showing that if they have, like, if
19
you're communicating with them on Facebook Messenger, they'll see your page and that's sometimes a bit
uncomfortable for certain people. If they want to maintain a professional relationship. But yeah, in terms of
academic, academics, I think they're both equal meeting in terms of what they offer. I just think there's so
much more to the Facebook Messenger than just communicating, which some people might not feel
comfortable. Yeah.
Speaker 1
But what about like features and functions do you think of any that you might use in Gothenburg or in the
UK, back at home? And the features for the academic, academic, or professional setting?
Speaker 2
Are you what I can say from what both of them don't have? If that works better than they have a setting to the
show? So that's what other platforms you have a bit that both of them don't. They also don't have settings for
sort of teacher control of their screens. So when we went into the pandemic and lockdown they weren't used
as a means of communication with teachers because the teachers on all the platforms could use their own
settings to kind of dictate to them what goes on in the class but I think Whatsapp and Facebook Messenger
for academic needs in classes aren't really used that much, because in terms of like, from student to student, I
don't think there's really a big difference in terms of features. You can share documents both can share photos
and videos.
Speaker 1
Okay, and okay, and how about the privacy policy of each app influenced your decision to use them? You
know, data security.
Speaker 2
15
Yeah
Speaker 1
What do you even think about?
Speaker 2
20
I'm pretty sure better and by the same company. So in that instance, I wouldn't think there was much of a
difference because both would be following the same guidelines. But because the when you sort of access
WhatsApp and access Facebook Messenger, nothing really comes up about privacy, or you don't really see it
when you're using it daily. So it doesn't really come to your mind about privacy. But I feel Yeah, I feel it's,
yeah, I don't really think on a day to day basis privacy really comes up as an important thing. Obviously, if
you if you're looking at not just privacy with online with the data, but privacy in terms of other people using
your phone and access to, to those messaging platforms, I don't think there's really an easy way of like
protecting yourself. So they don't ask for passwords and things like that. And so that yeah, in that sense, there's
not much privacy my belief there. But in terms of privacy from where matter, all the data or anything, I don't
really think that's an important thing for me.
Speaker 1
I just add a little bit on that. I mean, I don't know if you've heard about end to end encryption on WhatsApp.
So there's not on WhatsApp, that messenger doesn't have that where you put the passcode in the answer that
question encryption means that when you send a message to someone, this message is only seen by you and
the receiver and WhatsApp doesn't have really access to it, or it has like an encrypted kind of version of
passages.
Speaker 2
But for the average user of WhatsApp, they, if they're not explained that they probably will just brush it off as
security critical. So So yeah, and I also don't think that's, like, maybe if I was looking at the settings or might
read about it, yeah, it's gonna be something as interesting before someone like my grandparents or my parents,
I don't think they really understand that and be they wouldn't find that important. So depends on Yeah, not
everyone is knowledgeable about that stuff. So if you can explain it, like on the screen, everything, it's not
really that important to most people.
Speaker 1
And, okay, and how does the “seen” or “read” feature in both Messenger and WhatsApp influence your
communication habits or preferences? Yeah,
Speaker 2
I think that's important because the fact that just viewing the message can tell you so much about what their
reaction is. So it doesn't matter if they reply to anything, but I think the fact that they've seen it tells you quite
a lot, but also because if you look when the messages pop up on your phone, you can view them like without
21
going into WhatsApp or so that sort of goes around that concept waste of therapeutics. And all these things.
16
So you can still see it. But you have it doesn't show that you see something that has an impact as well. So it's
important, but there are loopholes around it, which I don’t think people…
Speaker 1
Loopholes? Like what's the main purpose of just not just going in the app and seeing the message and then
you can just leave there if you don't want to continue the conversation.
Speaker 2
So yeah a couple of things. It's easy to access it just on your phone and messages come up. So you don't have
to go through in school for everything. I know. It's not the biggest amount of time spent on that, but it's still
something if you get loads of messages. And secondly, as I said before, it says a lot when you read something
but maybe not reply to it. So sometimes you don't have the time to reply to it or you just don't want to reply to
it. Yet. But the fact that someone sees that you've got a big wad of your tick, they can say that either you're
ignoring their messages, or that you're not interested or something like that. So the blue ticks say quite a lot,
especially when you're not replying to a message.
Speaker 1
So you'd feel like a little bit of pressure? Yeah. Makes sense. So last two questions. In what way starts to
seem to ease of use of each platform influence your preference?
Speaker 2
As I said before, I think is much more easy to use, because it's just communication. It's not like it's not a, it is
a social media platform. But it's not like where you're sharing photos and things like that. Although I would
say WhatsApp is slightly becoming more like that. When you can use your profile picture to share things and
things like that. I still think that WhatsApp has more of a specific use Facebook is quite a lot of different things.
And I just feel specifically with the new people and like people you don't really know I think it's easier to
communicate with them and Facebook's a bit harder. Is it to interface or is the mechanism of being able to get
in contact with people because it's so linked to it's not linked to a phone number. It's linked to friends. So that
means that you have to be friends with people. But that also just another point, because you don't have to link
to the phone number. So one of the things I've just thought of now is for me when I came to my exchange year,
and all the people I was trying to contact I didn't have a funnel before so you just type them up on Facebook,
and then you can find them quite easily. So there are pluses and minuses of both of them. But yeah, I feel
WhatsApp in my situation has been the easiest.
22
Speaker 1
Okay, last question and it is about the functionality of these platforms in different devices such as mobile or
desktop. And does that influence your choice? And if so, can you provide me with some examples?
Speaker 2
So that's desktop or mobile? Yeah.
Speaker 1
Like do you use them both ways, did you use them differently and what functionality has it?
17
Speaker 2
I use. So I use Facebook, messenger and WhatsApp and I use them both on my desktop and mobile. But I
feel for the desktop it's easier to use whatsapp because you don't have to keep logging in and logging out.
And also for me, the notifications come up directly on my desktop, but only if I'm logged into Facebook, all
the notifications come back up in terms of different benefits and stuff, I feel both of them are the same.
Really I don't think there's much difference in terms of the interface when you're using it on a desktop. I
think they sort of copied each other in that sort of in that field. Yeah, I think there's much difference.
Speaker 1
This was the last question. So I'm going to end the interview now. Thank you so much.
23
18
24