Literature review 20.10.2009 – group 19: Michael, Julie, Louise and Lene
Literature review
Research question:
What are the differences, if any, on how men and women express themselves when using status updates on
Facebook?
Introduction
Our focus in this research paper is how gender can effect texts written in status updates on the social media
Facebook. We intend to examine what differences there are in the status updates and how they are shown. In
extension to this, we will try to find out if male Facebook users use different kinds of updates than females
and if so, why this is.
In this literature review we will write up what researchers have said in relation to our topic. None of the
research has discussed in detail how gendered communication applies to Facebook, nor do they explain in
detail the way it is reflected in status updates. They do however provide theoretical basis for discussing the
research question.
We have grouped the literature review in different categories depended on the texts individual theme, topic
and how they relate to our topic. The themes are as follows; social media, gender, and categorization of
behaviour on Facebook. This division of our references will help us relate the texts to one another and also
keep the sub-topics at hand.
Social Media
The first theme we want to work with is “Social Media”. To help us analyse Facebook and peoples use of
status updates, we use Goffman, Meyrowitz and Hjarvard when discussing construction of identity, social
roles and how people act in different social situations.
Construction of Identity
In the article “Selskabelige Teknologier1” Hjarvard argues that media have two functions: one is to give
information, another is to have a social function. Media, he says, are ways to create social contact and are
sociable technologies as much as information technologies [Hjarvard p. 22]. One of Hjarvards points is that
we increasingly prefer to gain contact through media, we prefer to be together with media instead of humans,
because through media we can manipulate with our social roles and through media we can better control
social situations.
1 ”Sociable technologies.”
Side 1 af 6
Literature review 20.10.2009 – group 19: Michael, Julie, Louise and Lene
This point is interesting in regards to our assignment because it can help us understand why people use
Facebook to share information about themselves through status updates.
Life as a performance
The fact that people can manipulate and control their social roles is something the sociologist Erving
Goffman also works on. In “Everyday Performance” Goffmann describes social life using the metaphor of
drama. Goffman uses the terms onstage and backstage to explain the interaction between humans and the
construction of our identity. Goffman sees everyday life as a performance with an audience, an onstage and a
backstage. As a development on Goffmans performance theory, Hjarvard argues that the new media – the
internet, tv etc. – manipulates with the boundary between onstage and backstage. In the Victorian society in
the 20th century, a gentleman could easily maintain onstage and backstage, but tv changes this proportion.
The tv-media creates a transparent world, where everybody can observe everybody (Meyrowitz in Hjarvard
p. 27). Thereby it is hard to maintain the onstage and backstage, and a new sphere arises; the middle region
(Meyrowitz in Hjarvard p. 28), which is half private, half public.
These aspects are interesting to our subject in regards to analyse how people use Facebook to create a role
and to discuss how people act on Facebook.
Hvorfor fænger Facebook?2
In this article Malene Charlotte Larsen writes how Facebook catches on to both the young and the old users
of Facebook. Facebook is catching for adults for the same reasons as Facebook and other social network sites
are catching for children. According to Malene Charlotte Larsen these social sites give us the opportunity to
do 10 different things, in many ways the statements in these things can be connected and compared to what
the sociologist Erving Goffman describes as social life seen as a metaphor for drama, being on stage and
backstage. E.g. people have to perform in virtual reality, when being constantly online on Facebook e.g.
when they write about themselves in the status updates. The article is useful when the interest is to put some
of the theory in context.
Gender
Sex differences and similarities in Communication
This text looks at the word choice of men and women sampling language from various situations and from a
lot of people.
Mulac et al. ’observe gender linked ”tendencies” in men and women’s language use to favour certain
linguistic features over others’ and discover 16 language features to be gender-distinguishing.
2
”Why does Facebook catch on?”
Side 2 af 6
Literature review 20.10.2009 – group 19: Michael, Julie, Louise and Lene
Our research question concerns the way that (and indeed if) gender has an influence on profile updates on
Facebook. The style patterns as well as the list of linguistic features characteristic for typical male and
female communication, presented in his text, may provide an analytical apparatus to the extent that, because
this particular research tells us the linguistic indicators of gender affecting communication, using this theory,
we will be able to analyse our Facebook updates using these guidelines. That way, we will be able to some
extent to measure the amount of gender influence on communication on Facebook profile updates.
Speech Acts and Face-work
Hustede covers the speech act theory of Austin and Searle which presents specific speech act types and how
they are manifested in everyday language. A speech act is characterized by not being something that one
should consider as a normal utterance. The listener doesn’t consider the truthfulness of a statement.
The speech acts are grouped into categories according to how they relate to the concept of face. Face
clumsily translates into public ”self esteem”. One takes on a certain status, hoping that others will confirm
and support it. Only in a setting with other people present may there be such a thing as public status. Speech
acts may then be categorized as either face-threatening or face supportive.
John Searle’s speech acts and the theory on face-work provides a concrete analytical method which allows
the extraction of meaning from language. And seeing as we’re interested in the use of male and female use of
Facebook updates, these theories are a tool of understanding the language within these Facebook updates.
The articles also serve a purpose when used alongside Mulac’s article about linguistic features and their
connection with gender. If we are able to extract the language specific traits that set male and female speech
apart, we may be able to uncover how their way of using Facebook updates differ from each other.
Men, women and friendship - what they say, what they do
Karen Walker has examined 52 in-depth interviews with working-class and professional men and women, to
examine gender differences in friendships.
Walker has captured gender as an ongoing social creation based on specific cultural norms, and not as a
development of peoples´ personality type which lead to certain behavior. This statement connects with
Mulac’s concept of gender which may be useful in connection with an analysis of our empirical research
based on Mulac’s 16 gender specific language features.
The article is semi-relevant to our report, since the main focus in the article is friendship, and not
communication and status updates within gender differences on Facebook. However, the article still defines
some differences between men and women, that can be useful to our report.
Side 3 af 6
Literature review 20.10.2009 – group 19: Michael, Julie, Louise and Lene
The study can be useful in our report; if similarities to the quote can be found in our research on status
updates, then the theory would be relevant. For instance do females share feelings with their friends on
Facebook, when using updates?
Using email for personal relationships
According to Boneva and Kraut men and women tend to maintain their relationships in different ways. In
this article Boneva and Kraut question whether this is also the case
when it comes to maintaining
relationships through email.
Using Spence and Helmreich (1978) Boneva et al. introduces the terms expressiveness and instrumentality.
Expressiveness being an emotional behaviour, and instrumentality being a relationship concerning common
interests. Women tend to be more expressive and men more instrumental in maintaining their relationship.
Furthermore Boneva et al. stress that women tend
to seek dialog, while men tend to interrupt
communication. Therefore women use the phone for maintaining relationships, while men use the phone for
short messages. Women are more likely to use the internet to communicate.
This article can be relevant inasmuch as it discusses the general characteristic of gendered communication. It
will be interesting to see whether the empirical data from this article corresponds with our collected data.
Gender and Power in Online Communication
In this article Herring argues, that on the internet men are more likely to post longer messages, begun and
close discussions in mixed-sex groups, while female tend to post relative short messages, and are more likely
to qualify and justify their assertions, apologies, express support of others, and in general manifest an
“aligned” orientation towards their interlocutors (Herring p. 5). In terms of politeness, women are more
likely to thank, appreciate and apologise, while men generally appear to be less concerned with politeness.
The article connects with the other articles on gender and communication. Furthermore the politeness
theories by Austin and Searle may prove useful in connection with the politeness strategies described by
Herring.
Categorising – behaviour
The general main uses of Facebook
The goal of the article is to uncover the most common uses of Facebook by deciphering categories extracted
from questionnaires.
Our research is concerned with gendered use of status updates on Facebook. Because the article supplies a
”uses and gratifications framework”(Joinson 2008) uncovering the most frequent uses of Facebook, it will be
useful in our research in terms of characterizing what Facebook is like as a media. It may also be possible for
Side 4 af 6
Literature review 20.10.2009 – group 19: Michael, Julie, Louise and Lene
us to determine whether this has developed and how the primary uses apply to gender specific use of
Facebook.
Facebook updates retorik
According to Nadja Pass, many Facebook users enjoy writing small status updates about their everyday life.
It tends to be a kind of micro blogging. The personalities at Facebook varies a lot, so the target group is
unknown. Therefore the starting-point has to be oneself.
During our status updates, we will touch different spheres, and therefore different people.
Pass thinks it is possible to divide Facebook-users in the following categories. She has invented 10 categories
within which "Facebook profile" appears.
Side 5 af 6
Literature review 20.10.2009 – group 19: Michael, Julie, Louise and Lene
References
1) Boneva, B., Kraut, R., & Frohlich, D. (2001): Using E-mail for personal relationships: The
difference gender makes. American Behavioral Scientist, 45 (3, p. 530-549).
2) Herring, S. (2008): Gender and Power in On-line communication. In M.M. Janet Holmes (ed.) The
Handbook of Languages and Gender. [p. 202-228].
3) Hjarvard, Stig (2003): ”Selskabelige teknologier” in Det selskabelige samfund. København:
Samfundslitteratur, [p. 17-33].
4) Husted, Jørgen (1982); "Austin og Searle: Talehandlinger" Vor tids filosofi / redigeret af Poul
Lübcke. - Videnskab og sprog. - . - S. 236-249, 356-357 : ill. København: Politikens Forlag.
5) Hustede, Jørgen: Austin og Searle Talehandlinger
6) Joinson, A.N. (2008); ‘Looking at’, ’Looking up’ or ’Keeping up with’ people? Motives and Uses of
Facebook. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems (Florence, Italy, April 05-10 2008), CHI ‘08, ACM, New York, (pp. 1027-1036).
7) Lampe, C., Ellison, N. and Steinfield, C. (2007). A Familiar Face(book): Profile Elements as Signals
in an Online Social Network. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (San Jose,
CA, 2007), ACM Press.
8) Mey, Jacob: How Speech Acts Function
9) Meyrowitz, Joshua (1985): “Media and Behavior” in No sense of place. Oxford University Press. [p.
13-34.]
10) Mulac, Anthony (2006): Sex Differences and Similarities in Communication: 12. (s.219) The
gender-linked language effect. Dindia, K., & Canary, D. J.
11) Pass, Nadja "Facebook Updates Retorik", 2008,
http://www.kommunikationsforum.dk/?articleid=13329
12) Walker, Karen (1994): “Men, women and friendship - what they say, what they do” in Gender and
Society, 8 (2, p. 246-265).
Side 6 af 6