A Taxonomy of Social Networking Site Users: Social Surveillance and Self‐surveillance Perspective

Abstract

Since social networking sites (SNS) are widely used in modern society, users increasingly use SNS to manage or maintain their existing social relationships and form new ones. This research applies social surveillance and self‐surveillance to classify SNS user types and explores each type's effect on SNS’ marketing performances. Three hundred three online questionnaires are collected to test the research questions. The results of cluster analysis and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) reveal the following four user types based on the different degrees of social surveillance and self‐surveillance: versatile users, self‐expression users, pass‐along users, and introvert users. Further, the introvert users have the least impact on product‐related information sharing, perception of social presence, purchase intention toward offers on SNS, and emotional experiences in social shopping among the four SNS user types.

The effects of online negative word‐of‐mouth on dissatisfied customers: A frustration–aggression perspective

“…The researchers identified the first complainant with the support of their network from the banking industry; all the other following interviewees were recommended by the participants themselves. This aligns with the snowballing sampling approach, which is acknowledged to “improve the efficiency in locating appropriate subjects” (Park, Shin, & Ju, , p. 603). It results in interviewees who are familiar with each other, reducing potential group thinking yet increasing a participant's self‐expression, which allows for a researcher's conceptualization of the talk's “depth, detail, emotionality, nuance, and coherence” (Denzin, , p. 902).…”

Feelings and functionality in social networking communities: A regulatory focus perspective

“…This study also contributes to the literature by incorporating regulatory focus theory to test how individual differences moderate motivational orientations. Future research can augment our findings related to social networking experiences and regulatory focus, including: (a) cross‐cultural differences related to social capital and electronic word of mouth (e.g., Krishen & Hu, ; Krishen, Leenders, Muthaly, Ziółkowska, & LaTour, ), (b) loneliness and social exclusion (e.g., Berezan, Krishen, & Jenveja, ; Dennis, Alamanos, Papagiannidis, & Bourlakis, ), and (c) privacy and risk aversion (e.g., Park, Shin, & Ju, ).…”

Value co‐creation in online healthcare communities: The impact of patients’ reference frames on cure and care

“…The self versus other perspective adopted in this paper might be linked to the concepts of self‐ and social surveillance as used by Park et al. (). The authors define self‐surveillance as “behavior in which individuals monitor, manage, and control their own expression and presentation,” while social surveillance is defined as “individuals’ use of social networking sites to track others’ actions, beliefs, and interests” (Park et al., , p. 602).…”

“…(). The authors define self‐surveillance as “behavior in which individuals monitor, manage, and control their own expression and presentation,” while social surveillance is defined as “individuals’ use of social networking sites to track others’ actions, beliefs, and interests” (Park et al., , p. 602). Self‐ and other‐surveillance are based on social cues and affect how people adapt their behavior in a social appropriate way.…”

“…However, patients appear less inclined to engage in emotional support through self-referencing, because they focus on physical-medical issues in traditional models and thereby disregard emotions (Wilson et al, 2007). The self versus other perspective adopted in this paper might be linked to the concepts of self-and social surveillance as used by Park et al (2015). The authors define self-surveillance as "behavior in which individuals monitor, manage, and control their own expression and presentation," while social surveillance is defined as "individuals' use of social networking sites to track others' actions, beliefs, and interests" (Park et al, 2015, p. 602).…”