Motivations, Consumption Emotions, and Temporal ...

International Journal of Strategic Communication

ISSN: 1553-118X (Print) 1553-1198 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hstc20

Motivations, Consumption Emotions, and Temporal Orientations in Social Media Use: A Strategic Approach to Engaging Stakeholders Across Platforms Yan Jin, Jhih-Syuan (Elaine) Lin, Bob Gilbreath & Yen-I Lee To cite this article: Yan Jin, Jhih-Syuan (Elaine) Lin, Bob Gilbreath & Yen-I Lee (2017): Motivations, Consumption Emotions, and Temporal Orientations in Social Media Use: A Strategic Approach to Engaging Stakeholders Across Platforms, International Journal of Strategic Communication, DOI: 10.1080/1553118X.2017.1285769 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2017.1285769

Published online: 21 Feb 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 118

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=hstc20 Download by: [University of Georgia]

Date: 28 February 2017, At: 15:08

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC COMMUNICATION http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2017.1285769

Motivations, Consumption Emotions, and Temporal Orientations in Social Media Use: A Strategic Approach to Engaging Stakeholders Across Platforms Yan Jina, Jhih-Syuan (Elaine) Lina, Bob Gilbreathb, and Yen-I Leea a

Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA; bAhalogy, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA ABSTRACT

How to engage stakeholders effectively with different social media platforms is an important topic in strategic communication research. Grounded in uses and gratifications theory, consumption emotion theory, and temporal orientation framework, this study conducted an online survey among social media users in the United States (N = 940) to examine how individuals’ motivations, emotions, and temporal orientations in social media use might differ by multi-platform usage groups (i.e., Facebook+Instagram users vs. Facebook+Pinterset users). Our findings indicate that Facebook +Instagram users focus more on self-status seeking and entertainment, while Facebook+Pinterest users are more information-seeking driven and future-oriented. In addition, more optimism is detected among Facebook +Pinterest users. Implications for strategic communication theory development as well as insights for organization-stakeholder engagement on social media are discussed.

Introduction The tremendous global growth in social media usage and the increasing interest among organizations and opinion leaders in using different social media platforms to engage stakeholders in different ways has made social media one of the most important research topics in the field of strategic communication (Macnamara & Zerfass, 2012; Sedereviciute & Valentini, 2011). Today, stakeholders actively engage in and benefit from communicative actions of searching, selecting, and sharing information among their communities on social media that help them make decisions, increase their knowledge, act upon issues, and solve problems (Kim & Grunig, 2011; Sedereviciute & Valentini, 2011). Therefore, social media serve as a critical tool for stakeholders to seek relevant information from or about organizations and for organizations to seek direct interactions with stakeholders at relatively low cost and higher levels of efficiency than traditional communication tools (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010; Sedereviciute & Valentini, 2011). As Avery, Lariscy, and Sweetser (2010) noted, social media create an instantly available outlet for message disseminations, allowing organizations to quickly respond to or even test the message saliency among stakeholders on social media. In their book, Social Media and Strategic Communications, Al-Deen and Hendricks (2013) noted that advertising, marketing, and public relations are among the leading industries in strategic communication that have exploited social media’s strategic functions in enhancing communication management. In discussing the challenges of balancing openness, strategy and management in the context of social media communication in organizations, Macnamara and Zerfass (2012) pointed out that being strategic means long-term and big picture focused. Strategic communication research CONTACT Yan Jin [email protected] Hooper Street, Athens, GA 30602, USA. © 2017 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Georgia, 120

2

Y. JIN ET AL.

serves a critical function of informing and influencing the organization in relation to “public expectations, concerns, interests, and needs” (Macnamara & Zerfass, 2012, p. 291). Considering that, extant research has studied how consumer persuasion knowledge and advertiser sincerity impact eWOM of marketer-generated messages (Lee & Hansen, 2013), what social media platforms were used the most by organizations (Macnamara & Zerfass, 2012), how Twitter was used as a gateway to relationship marketing (Watkins & Lewis, 2013), how social media was used as marketing techniques and strategies for revenue generation (Gilbreah, 2014), how Fortune 500 companies used their Facebook fan pages to engage stakeholder (Shin, Gatithers, Lee, Graham, & Hendricks, 2013), how organizations used Twitter and Facebook to build relationship and to communicate transparently and authentically (McCorkindale, 2012), and more. Although most research on social media in strategic communication has focused on how and why communication professionals use different social media platforms to communicate and develop mutual understanding and ongoing enduring relationships with stakeholders (e.g., Avery & Graham, 2013; Avery et al., 2010; Sweetser & Kelleher, 2011), it is important to understand stakeholders’ motivations, feelings, and other experiences in using different social media platforms, as it provides insightful implications for organizations to make strategic decision on their cross-platform stakeholder communication and engagement strategies (Sedereviciute & Valentini, 2011). As of 2015, nearly 65% of American adults use social media (Perrin, 2015). Given that over half of all online adults use two or more social media sites (Duggan, Ellison, Lampe, Lenhart, & Madden, 2015), research on “the diversification in the usage of social media platforms, in conjunction with their specialization” (Zignani, Esfandyari, Gaito, & Rossi, 2016, p. 2) is timely. While Facebook remains the most popular platform for users and marketers (Duggan et al., 2015; Salesforce Research, 2016), it is imperative to further understand the unique opportunities that the use of combined platforms brings to strategic communication practices. As Berger and Iyengar (2013) indicated, a medium can shape the message and the channel consumers communicate through can affect the products and brands they discuss. Sedereviciute and Valentini (2011) argued that organizations “need to identify their online stakeholders before deciding, which tool to use and how to use it in communicating with them” (p. 224). We thus argue that, in order for organizations to engage their stakeholders more effectively, more research efforts are needed to shed light on how and why stakeholders use multiple social media platforms differently. Nowadays, an organization’s strategic decision regarding social media channel choice gets more complex as stakeholders often simultaneously adopt different social media platform to interact with organizations and brands (Zignani et al., 2016). The pressing questions are: How do people connect and establish relationships on multiple social platforms, which they adopt simultaneously and use in a combined fashion? How different people using different combination of social media platforms “differentiate their interests and convey diverse contents” (Zignani et al., 2016)? To answer this important call for future research, this study takes a stakeholdercentric approach to examining why and how online stakeholders use several social media platforms differently. Unlike existing social media-focused strategic communication research, which either only studied one type of social media platform (Shin et al., 2013; Watkins & Lewis, 2013) or compared how two types of social media platforms were used as organizational stakeholder engagement tools (McCorkindale, 2012), this study, using an online survey of representative U.S. adult sample, examines how individuals’ motivations, emotions, and temporal orientations in social media use might differ by multiple platform usage groups (i.e., Facebook+Instagram users vs. Facebook+Pinterest users). Findings of this study provides further insights for organizations’ strategic decision making when it comes to effectively engage stakeholders who simultaneously use multiple social media platforms.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC COMMUNICATION

3

Literature review The rise of visual social media in strategic communication In strategic communication and social media literature, Facebook and Twitter have emerged as two of the most studied platforms (McCorkindale, 2012; Shin et al., 2013; Watkins & Lewis, 2013). Few studies in the field of strategic communication, have focused on visual social media such as Instagram and Pinterest, the adoption rates of which have been increasing over the recent years and reflecting the trend for organizations and brands to engage their stakeholders in visual-element dominated message channels (Jin, Austin, Guidry, & Parrish, in press). Instagram The mobile social networking platform Instagram, founded in 2010 and acquired by Facebook in 2012, is an emerging new form in this realm, via which both organizations and publics can convey organizational crisis information. Instagram is a social networking channel that allows users to take and share photos and videos after applying a choice of digital filters via a smartphone app. The resulting visuals can then be easily shared on other social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and Tumblr. Instagram has been growing rapidly, in 2015 reaching 400 million monthly active users who are on a daily average posting 55 million photos and contributing 1.2 billion “likes” to the platform (Dora, 2013). Instagram is only available as a mobile application and has thereby become the visual engagement platform for mobile phones and tablet computers. Based on a recent report by the Pew Internet & American Life Project, Instagram has surpassed Twitter in popularity with 26% of online U.S. users using the platform (Duggan et al., 2015). According to the study, 53% of young adults in the 18–29 age group use the service in 2015, compared to 37% in 2013. In addition, Hispanics and African Americans are particularly likely to be active on Instagram (Duggan et al., 2015). Pinterest Pinterest is a social media platform that allows its users to save and/or share content in the form of a “pin.” Often referred to as a “visual bookmark tool these pins are organized on different boards which represent projects or specific areas of interest created by the user, such as “Holiday Recipes” or “Kitchen Remodeling Ideas.” Users can follow other users’ boards if they have similar tastes. Each pin can have up to three components: the image (always present as any pin by nature is an image), the caption (almost always present, although some pins might not have any caption), and the website the pin directly links to (often present, as many pins contain links to external sites). Other Pinterest users can respond by reposting pins on one of their own boards—called “repinning”—and by “liking” and commenting on the pins. As of January 2015, 28% of online U.S. adults 18 and older use Pinterest. Demographically, 34% of Pinterest users are between the ages of 18 and 29, and 42 percent of online U.S. women are active users of the platform (Duggan et al., 2015). In one of the first studies focusing on Pinterest, researchers found that female users were repinned more often than male users (Gilbert, Bakhshi, Chang, & Terveen, 2013). Gilbert et al. (2013) also mentioned the difficulty of randomly sampling Pinterest, and suggested that the best solution would be for Pinterest to publish an API1 to facilitate appropriate data sampling (so far, Pinterest’s available API is focused on large corporations and is not openly accessible) (Gilbert et al., 2013; Lunden, 2013). Stakeholders’ motivations for using social media The theory of uses and gratifications (U&G) (Katz, 1959) is utilized as the theoretical approach for the current study. The theoretical model postulates that stakeholders are goal-directed and actively 1

API stands for Application Programming Interface, and can make social media data more trackable.

4

Y. JIN ET AL.

consume, participate, and engage with media to fulfill their needs and desires; it emphasizes on motivations for media usage, social and psychological traits that influence such usage, and attitudes or behaviors that develop as a result of the joint influence of motivations and traits (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1974; Ruggiero, 2000). The U&G approach has been frequently employed to explicit users’ goals related to diverse media usage, including digital and social media (e.g., Hanson & Haridakis, 2008; Papacharissi & Rubin, 2000; Smock, Ellison, Lampe, & Wohn, 2011; Whiting & Williams, 2013). Shao (2009) took a theoretical approach to the appeal of user-generated media (i.e., YouTube, MySpace, and Wikipedia) from the U&G perspective. The study identified the interdependence of people’s consuming, participating, and producing on user-generated media. People consume on social media for information and entertainment, participate on social media for social interaction and community development, and produce content on social media for self-expression and selfactualization (Shao, 2009). Wang, Tchernev, and Solloway (2012) conducted a longitudinal examination of college students’ social media use, needs, and gratifications and proposed a conceptual model of reciprocal dynamic influences of social media use, other media use, needs and gratifications. Social media use in this study included blogs, email, Facebook, IM, LinkedIn, MySpace, online discussion forums, Skype, Twitter, Wikis, YouTube, and others. Social media use was found to be strongly driven by emotional, cognitive, social and habitual needs, but only gratified some of these needs. Ungratified needs were found to accumulate over time and drove subsequent social media use. Bolton et al. (2013) focused on Generation Y’s use of social media. Among the proposed antecedents and consequences of social media use by Generation Y, the types of use included contributing, sharing, consuming, searching, participating, and playing. Among existing social media platforms, Facebook received the most research attention. For instance, Park, Kee, and Valenzuela (2009) studied uses and gratifications and social outcomes on Facebook groups, based on an online survey of college students. The reasons for users participating in Facebook groups were found to include socializing, entertainment, self-status seeking, and information seeking. Papacharissi and Mendelson (2011) combined the U&G theory with the social network approach to examine how motives and social-psychological characteristics influence Facebook use, social network structural factors and social capital generated. The researchers identified several motives in their study, including expressive information seeking, habitual passing of time, relaxing entertainment, cool and new trend, companionship, professional advancement, escape, social interaction and meeting new people. Cheung, Chiu, and Lee (2011) examined the reasons for students to use Facebook. The psychometric properties of the measure they developed include we-intention, subjective norm, group norms, social identity, purposive value, self-discovery, maintaining interpersonal interconnectivity, social enhancement, entertainment value, and social presence. Further, We-intention was found to be a strong determinant for students to use Facebook among all values identified, social related factors had the most impact on their intention to use social media. However, little empirical research has been devoted to explore why and how stakeholders use image-driven social media, such as Instagram and Pinterest. Mull and Lee (2014) conducted a twostep study to examine user gratifications obtained from Pinterest. They found that fashion, creative projects, entertainment, virtual exploration, and organization emerged as primary motivations for college students. Users likely use Pinterest to search or shop for fashion-related products; to explore and share creative ideas pertain to their interests; to obtain entertaining experiences that are enjoyable, simple to navigate, and easy to comprehend; to learn information about interesting things and new ideas; and to collect and organize images. Similarly, Sashittal and Jassawalla (2015) discovered that Pinterest-using college students are psychologically healthy and grounded; they seek and find authentic experiences and enrichment through their Pinterest usage. In addition, Sheldon and Bryant (2016) conducted a survey among undergraduate students and revealed four motivations related to their Instagram usage, including surveillance/knowledge about others, documentation, coolness/popularity, and creativity.


5

Their findings suggested that people are likely to use Instagram to check out what others are doing, to document moments of their lives for self-promotion and to gain popularity, and to portray their creative skills through visual presentation and hashtages creation. Because the strength of the U&G approach may be enhanced by exploring similar typologies of motivations across media types (Ruggiero, 2000), this study compares Facebook+Instagram versus Facebook +Pinterest user motives with regard to different social media platform combinations to better understand the extent to which stakeholders expect various needs will be fulfilled by different social media usage. Therefore, we ask: RQ1: What, if any, are the different motivations for Facebook+Instagram users and Facebook+ Pinterest users to use Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest)?

Consumption emotions in social media use Emotions are an important subject of study in consumer research and essential component in understanding consumer communications and responses (Richins, 1997). Westbrook and Oliver (1991) defined consumption emotion as “the set of emotional responses elicited specifically during product usage or consumption experience” (p. 85). The authors emphasized the importance to study patterns of consumption emotion, as knowledge of such patterns will provide a more thorough picture of consumers’ overall emotional experience, rather than isolating the understanding of emotion in to separate basic emotion types or reducing it into emotional dimensions such as valence and arousal. In order to comprehensively picture consumption emotions, Richins (1997) developed a measurement of emotions specifically in the consumption experience, composed by13 types of discrete emotions, including anger, discontent, worry, sadness, fear, shame, envy, loneliness, romantic love, love, peacefulness, contentment, and optimism. Each discrete emotion functions differently to influence consumers’ cognitive process and decision-making. For instance, Griskevicius, Shiota, and Nowlis (2010) studied how two discrete positive emotions—pride and contentment—influenced product desirability, using experiments. According to Williams (2014), the impact of emotions on judgments, evaluations, and decisions has been an important research area in psychology and consumer behavior, with topics under examination such as “what drives the experience of discrete emotional states, how those discrete emotions uniquely affect decision making and the motivations that consumer might have to regulate emotional state over time” (p. viii). Extended this statement to the social media environment, social media users’ emotions experienced during their social media use can influence their decision of information sharing, interaction with other users, and social media platform choice making. Botha and Reyneke (2013) found that social media users with positive emotion had higher willingness to share information with other people, and vice versa. In addition, studies about emotion on social media use focused on the emotional sharing (e.g., Kramer, 2012; Settanni & Marengo, 2015), emphasizing the influence of the external factors, such as message content or with the valence of a post on social media, on user’s emotions. Recently, the outcome of negative emotions experienced by social media users, especially Facebook users, was studied by researchers. Researchers found that, since the features of Facebook are highly self-presentation, virtual interaction, and large social networking, the negative emotions of Facebook users, such as jealous, distressed, and envy, can be triggered by comparing with other friends, feeling communication overload, and seeing ambiguous information from their partners or close friends (Chen & Lee, 2013; Muise, Christofides, & Desmarais, 2009; Tandoc, Ferrucci, & Duffy, 2015). These findings imply the associations between social media platform use and social media user emotions, as related to features and functions specific to different platforms. To further explore whether and how stakeholders feel during their use of different social media platforms, we ask:

6

Y. JIN ET AL.

RQ2: What, if any, are the different consumption emotions Facebook+Instagram users and Facebook+ Pinterest users experience when using Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest)?

Temporal orientations in social media use Jacoby, Szybillo, and Berning (1976) introduced the concepts of time into consumer research literature, arguing that time is both “an antecedent to and a consequence of purchase” (p. 320). Mayers-Levy and Maheswaran (1992) also pointed the role that time plays in affecting people’s judgments and behaviors during consumption experience. Bergadaa (1990) further studied the temporal system of consumers, “an important but neglected aspect of individual action and consumer behavior” (p. 289). Bergadaa (1990) examined the dimension of time in consumer action in a model of the “temporal cognitive system of the individual, which gives equal coverage of the social and personal time of the individual, the motivation to act, and the action process” (p. 290). Bergadaa (1990) further argued that different temporal orientations may induce different types of motivation, plans, and the attitudes as well as consumptions of different brands and products. The model delineated two types of temporal orientation, namely, present- vs. future-oriented. Mogilner, Aaker, and Kamvar (2012) studied how emotion can affect choice. Specifically, they found that the type of happiness pursued by consumers is determined by a consumer’s temporal focus—consumers tend to choose more exciting options when focused on the future, and more calming options when focused on the present moment. Chang and Pham (2013) further argued that the affective system of judgment and decision making is “inherently anchored in the present” (p. 42). Winterich and Haws (2011) posited that temporal focus is a central cognitive appraisal, centering on the extent to which an emotion results in future- vs. past- or present-oriented action tendencies, which also are central to the trade-offs between short-term desires to enjoy and long-term goals to accomplish that are characteristic of self-control dilemmas according to Hoch and Loewenstein (1991). Connecting consumption emotions with temporal orientations, Winterich and Haws (2011) investigated the role of temporal focus on the effect of discrete positive emotions on self-control dilemmas in snack consumption. For instance, hope is described as a positively valence and future-oriented emotion (Ellsworth & Smith, 1988; Lazarus, 1991), while happiness and pride, characterized by certainty, tend to be more present-oriented or past-oriented emotions (Ellsworth & Smith, 1988). They also found that participants experiencing a future-oriented positive emotion, such as hopefulness, consumer less unhealthy food and have lower preferences for unhealthy snacks than those in a past- or presentfocused emotional state, such as pride and happiness, suggesting that “consumers may benefit from adapting the temporal focus of positive emotions to the future” (p. 505). In term of stakeholders’ temporal orientations in social media use, only a few empirical studies exist. Gilbreah (2014) called for attention to Pinterest. Since its launching in 2009, Pinterset has become one of the fastest-growing digital platforms, as its visual layout, curated boards and intuitive mobile app have contributed to its popularity among users, who frequently use it to discover new projects and products (Gilbreah, 2014). By analyzing Pinterest boards with images pinned by female users, Phillips, Miller, and McQuarrie (2014) found strong selves and future-orientation occurred among female Pinterest users. Schwartz et al. (2015) found that female Facebook users were more toward future orientation and less present-orientation than males. However, these few studies only examined one social media platform’s user temporal orientations, without comparison with other platforms. Given the fact that social media users tend to use multiple platforms on a regular base, it is important for organizations to understand the association between stakeholders’ multiple social media platform use and their temporal orientations. Therefore, we ask:


7

RQ3: What, if any, are the different temporal orientations (past, present and future) Facebook +Instagram users and Facebook+ Pinterest users experience when using Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest)?

Gender differences in social media use According to a 2015 survey by the Pew Research Center (Perrin, 2015), females and males use social media at similar rates. About 68% of all women use social media, compared to 62% of all men (Perrin, 2015). However, there are still some gender differences observed for the adoption and use of different social media platforms. As of 2015, Facebook (77% vs. 66%), Instagram (31% vs. 24%) and Pinterest (44% vs. 16%) have a larger share of online women than online men (Anderson, 2015). In addition, gender is considered a significant predictor of social media use frequency, such that females are more frequent users than males (e.g., Barker, 2009; Sheldon & Bryant, 2016; Smock et al., 2011). The literature further suggests that even though both genders make equal use of the Internet, the type of use may vary (Joiner et al., 2005). For example, Peluchette and Karl (2008) found that females are likely to share romantic or “cute” pictures and/or information, while males are likely to post selfpromoting and risqué pictures or comments on social networking sites. Barker (2009) argued that females are more likely than males to use social media for relational maintenance, while males are more interested in information seeking and learning than females. In support of that view, Sheldon’s (2008, 2009) studies showed that females use Facebook more than males for maintaining relationships, for entertainment, and for passing time. Similarly, Hunt, Atkin, and Krishnan (2012) pointed out that females use Facebook for the interpersonal and entertainment motives more than males. In addition, females are likely to use interactive features more than males. Specific to image-related social media usage, Bond (2009) found that females are likely to share Facebook photos that include images portraying their friends and family, while males are likely to post more sports-related photos. Moreover, Ottoni and colleagues’ (2013) study uncovered that females use Pinterest to search and keep a record of items related to product and services of interest, whereas males tend to keep a collection of images that reflects their tastes. In light of these countervailing trends and the need to fill the gap in the literature regarding the moderating effect of gender on stakeholders’ motivations in using social media, their social media use-related consumption emotions and temporal orientations, we ask: RQ4: How, if at all, does gender influence why and how Facebook+Instagram users and Facebook+ Pinterest users use Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest), in terms of motivation, consumption emotions, and temporal orientations, respectively?

METHOD Survey participants and procedure An online survey with a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults was administered on Qualtrics, an online survey software and platform. The participants were recruited via Qualtrics Panel services in April 2015. This firm ensures reliable U.S. representativeness from panel sampling (nonvolunteer access) and meeting the following specifications set by the researchers for the purposes of this study: 1) Among the participants who complete the survey, there must be an even split between the number of female participants and the number of male participants; and 2) Among the participants who complete the survey, all must have at least an active

8

Y. JIN ET AL.

Facebook account and an active Instagram or Pinterest account to ensure the comparability across these platforms. Researchers were able to review the quality of online survey responses and reject/recollect additional responses after the data collection was finished, meeting the preceding specifications. The survey received a total of 940 completed responses (about 10% response rate) from the Qualtrics panel members invited. Participants were first asked to identify the social media platforms they have used. They were then assigned to one of the two groups: Facebook and Instagram (n = 470), and Facebook and Pinterest (n = 470). After that, they were instructed to answer questions pertaining to their motivations for using these social networking platforms, consumption emotions, temporal orientation during the usage, and demographics. Participants received e-points from Qualtrics for their participation in this study. Instrumentation Three sets of measures were used in this study, including motivations for using different social media platforms, consumption emotions felt when using different social media platforms, and temporal orientation during different social media use. Participants in the Facebook+Instagram user group responded to all questions regarding their Facebook use and Instagram use. Participants in the Facebook+Pinterest user group responded to all questions regarding their Facebook use and Pinterest use. Motivations for using different social media platforms A total of 17 items were used to form the measure for consumers’ motivations to use different social media platforms, primarily adapted from the 14-item measure Park et al. (2009) developed in studying uses and gratifications on social media, namely, socializing, entertainment, self-status seeking, and information seeking. Participants were asked to respond by indicating their agreement of each of the 17 statements regarding their use of Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest), respectively, using a 7-point Likert-type scale, where “1 = Strongly Disagree” and “7 = Strongly Agree.” Four types of social media motivations were rendered in the current study for Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest) use: 1) socializing (Facebook: alpha = .82; Instagram: alpha = .87; Pinterest: alpha = .92), including “to get peer support from others,” “to meet interesting people,” “to feel like I belong to a community,” “to talk about something with others,” and “to stay in touch with people I know”; 2) entertainment (Facebook: alpha = .84; Instagram: alpha = .84; Pinterest: alpha = .77), including “because it is entertaining,” “because it is funny,” and “because it is exciting”; 3) self-status seeking (Facebook: alpha = .86; Instagram: alpha = .86; Pinterest: alpha = .87), including “because I feel peer pressure to participate,” “because it makes myself look cool,”, and “to develop my career through group participation”; and 4) information seeking (Facebook: alpha = .88; Instagram: alpha = .91; Pinterest: alpha = .75). Consumption emotions A total of 13 types of consumption emotions were measured based on consumer research literature (Richins, 1997) and assessed by asking participants how often they experience any of the feelings when they used Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest), respectively. The emotions were measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale, where “1 = Never” and “7 = All the time,” in response to anger (frustrated, angry, irritated),”, “discontent (unfulfilled, discounted),” “worry (nervous, worries, tense),” “sadness (depressed, sad, miserable),” “fear (scared, afraid, panicky),” “shame (embarrassed, ashamed, humiliated),” “envy (envious, jealous),” “loneliness (lonely, homesick),” “romantic love (sexy, romantic, passionate),” “love (loving, sentimental, warm hearted),” “peacefulness (calm, peaceful),” “contentment (contented, fulfilled),”, and “optimism (optimistic, encouraged, hopeful).”


9

Temporal orientation Three items were used to measure participants’ temporal orientations in using Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest), respectively. Participants were asked to respond by indicating their agreement of each of the three statements regarding their social media platform use, using a 7point Likert-type scale, where “1 = Strongly Disagree” and “7 = Strongly Agree.” The three items are: 1) past orientation (“Mentally I’m focused on the past”); 2) present orientation (“Mentally I’m focused on what’s going on now”), and 3) future orientation (“Mentally I’m focused on planning for the future”). Data analyses MANOVAs were conducted to examine the main effects of social media platform user groups (Facebook+Instagram users vs. Facebook+Pinterest users) on survey participants’ motivations for using Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest), their consumption emotions felt when using Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest), and their temporal orientations during Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest) use, respectively. In addition, in each MANOVA, interaction effects exerted jointly by social media platform user groups (Facebook+Instagram users vs. Facebook+Pinterest users) and gender (female vs. male) were also examined on the preceding measures.

RESULTS Demographics and descriptives Among the 940 survey participants, 50% were female (n = 470) and the other 50% were male (n = 470). The majority (82.4%) were non-Hispanic White (n = 775), with the remaining 17.6% nonWhite (n = 165). The mean age of the participants was 37. The majority (55.9%, n = 525) reported a $30,001-$90,000 yearly household income range. Most of them had at least some experience of attending college (62.4%, n = 699). Half of the participants were 470 Facebook+Instagram users, and the other half of the participants were Facebook+ Pinterest users. The descriptive for motivations for using Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest), consumption emotions felt when using Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest), and temporal orientation during Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest) were reported in Table 1. Social media platform use motivations RQ1 asked, what, if any, are the different motivations for Facebook+Instagram users and Facebook+ Pinterest users to use Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest). Significant main effects of social media platform user groups (Facebook+Instagram users vs. Facebook+Pinterest users) were detected on different motivations for social media use. Statistically significant findings were reported as follows. Facebook Compared to Facebook+Pinterest users, Facebook+Instagram users used Facebook more to seek selfstatus (F [1, 939] = 10.33, p = .001, par. η2 = .01) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 3.23, SE = .08; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 2.86, SE = .08) and to seek information (F [1, 939] = 5.14, p = .024, par. η2 = .01) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 5.09, SE = .06; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 4.89, SE = .06). Visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest) On one hand, compared to Facebook+Pinterest users’ visual social media use (i.e., Pinterest), Facebook+Instagram users used visual social media (i.e., Instagram) more to socialize (F [1,

10

Y. JIN ET AL.

Table 1. Descriptives for motivations, consumption emotions, and temporal orientations Dependent Variables Motivations

Consumption Emotions

Temporal Orientations

Measures Socializing Entertainment Self-status Seeking Information Seeking Anger Discontent Worry Sadness Fear Shame Envy Loneliness Romantic Love Love Peacefulness Contentment Optimism Past Orientation Present Orientation Future Orientation

M M M M

= = = =

Facebook 4.81, SD = 5.11, SD = 3.02, SD = 4.98, SD =

1.27 1.27 1.74 1.25

M M M M

= = = =

Instagram 3.81, SD = 4.13, SD = 4.00, SD = 5.00, SD =

2.08 2.09 2.10 1.85

M M M M

= = = =

Pinterest 3.08, SD = 4.50, SD = 2.33, SD = 5.00, SD =

1.67 1.49 1.54 1.14

M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

2.73, 2.57, 2.22, 2.39, 1.84, 1.88, 2.51, 2.42, 2.52, 3.97, 4.29, 4.36, 4.49, 4.81, 5.11, 3.02,

1.79 1.79 1.64 1.68 1.50 1.50 1.74 1.84 1.88 1.92 1.84 1.88 1.86 1.27 1.27 1.74


= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

2.05, 2.05, 1.96, 2.05, 1.89, 1.89, 2.56, 2.27, 2.93, 3.43, 4.04, 3.72, 3.90, 3.81, 4.13, 4.00,

1.74 1.66 1.71 1.72 1.68 1.65 1.92 1.86 2.07 2.10 2.08 2.11 2.11 2.08 2.09 2.10


= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

1.35, 1.48. 1.35, 1.41, 1.29, 1.29, 1.94, 1.44, 2.00, 3.07, 4.00, 3.88, 4.12, 3.08, 4.50, 2.33,

1.02 1.07 1.00 1.03 1.00 .94 1.52 1.14 1.72 2.09 2.18 2.17 2.19 1.67 1.49 1.54

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

939] = 51.92, p = .000, par. η2 = .05) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 4.10, SE = .08; Facebook +Pinterest users: M = 3.28, SE = 08), to get entertained (F [1, 939] = 8.61, p = .003, par. η2 = .01) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 4.82, SE = .08; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 4.51, SE = .08), and to seek self-status (F [1, 939] = 25.06, p = .000, par. η2 = .05) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 3.14, SE = .08; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 2.55, SE = .08). On the other hand, compared to Facebook+Instagram users’ visual social media use (i.e., Instagram), Facebook+Pinterest users used visual social media (i.e., Pinterest) more to seek information (F [1, 939] = 46.28, p = .000, par. η2 = .05) (Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 4.95, SE = .07; Facebook+Instagram users: M = 4.27, SE = .07). Consumption emotions felt when using different social media platforms RQ2 asked, what, if any, are the different consumption emotions Facebook+Instagram users and Facebook+ Pinterest users experience when using Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest). Significant main effects of social media platform user groups (Facebook+Instagram users vs. Facebook+Pinterest users) were detected on different consumption emotions in using social media. Statistically significant findings were reported as follows. Facebook Compared to Facebook+Pinterest users, Facebook+Instagram users reported higher level of different consumption emotions (i.e., anger, discontent, worry, sadness, fear, shame, and romantic love) in using Facebook. Specifically, when using Facebook, Facebook+Instagram users felt more anger (F [1, 939] = 6.92, p = .009, par. η2 = .01) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 2.88, SE = .09; Facebook +Pinterest users: M = 2.55, SE = .09), discontent (F [1, 939] = 5.56, p = .019, par. η2 = .01) (Facebook +Instagram users: M = 2.69, SE = .09; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 2.40, SE = .09), worry (F [1, 939] = 5.05, p = .025, par. η2 = .01) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 2.33, SE = .08; Facebook +Pinterest users: M = 2.08, SE = .08), sadness (F [1, 939] = 5.05, p = .025, par. η2 = .01) (Facebook +Instagram users: M = 2.51, SE = .08; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 3.35, SE = .08), fear (F [1, 939] = 8.15, p = .004, par. η2 = .01) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 1.99, SE = .07; Facebook +Pinterest users: M = 1.69, SE = .07), shame (F [1, 939] = 4.55, p = .033, par. η2 = .01) (Facebook +Instagram users: M = 1.96, SE = .07; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 1.74, SE = .07), and romantic


11

love (F [1, 939] = 6.19, p = .013, par. η2 = .01) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 2.51, SE = .09; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 2.34, SE = .09). Visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest) Compared to Facebook+Pinterest users’ emotional experience in using visual social media (i.e., Pinterest), Facebook+Instagram users reported higher level of different consumption emotions (i.e., anger, discontent, worry, sadness, fear, shame, envy, loneliness, and romantic love) in using visual social media (i.e., Instagram). Specifically, when using Facebook, Facebook+Instagram users felt more anger (F [1, 939] = 25.26, p = .000, par. η2 = .03) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 1.97, SE = .07; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 1.46, SE = .07), discontent (F [1, 939] = 16.55, p = .000, par. η2 = .02) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 1.97, SE = .07; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 1.58, SE = .07), worry (F [1, 939] = 17.50, p = .000, par. η2 = .02) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 1.86, SE = .07; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 1.45, SE = .07), sadness (F [1, 939] = 19.82, p = .000, par. η2 = .02) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 1.95, SE = .07; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 1.51, SE = .07), fear (F [1, 939] = 16.12, p = .000, par. η2 = .02) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 1.78, SE = .07; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 1.40, SE = .07), shame (F [1, 939] = 16.70, p = .000, par. η2 = .02) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 1.78, SE = .07; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 1.40, SE = .07), envy (F [1, 939] = 16.74, p = .000, par. η2 = .02) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 2.48, SE = .08; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 1.98, SE = .09), loneliness (F [1, 939] = 34.52, p = .000, par. η2 = .04) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 2.19, SE = .08; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 1.56, SE = .08), and romantic love (F [1, 939] = 22.02, p = .000, par. η2 = .02) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 2.72, SE = .09; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 2.10, SE = .09). Temporal orientations in using different social media platforms RQ3 asked what, if any, are the different temporal orientations (past, present and future) Facebook +Instagram users and Facebook+ Pinterest users experience when using Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest). Significant main effects of social media platform user groups (Facebook+Instagram users vs. Facebook+Pinterest users) were detected on different temporal orientations for visual social media use (Instagram or Pinterest), but not when using Facebook. Statistically significant findings were reported below. On one hand, Facebook+Instagram users were more past-orientated when using visual social media (i.e., Instagram) than Facebook+Pinterest users (F [1, 939] = 28.32, p = .000, par. η2 = .03) (Facebook+Instagram users: M = 3.12, SE = .09; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 2.46, SE = .09). On the other hand, Facebook+Pinterest users were more future-orientated when using visual social media (i.e., Pinterest) than Facebook+Pinterest users (F [1, 939] = 32.65, p = .000, par. η2 = .03) (Facebook +Instagram users: M = 3.14, SE = .09; Facebook+Pinterest users: M = 2.44, SE = .09). Joint effects of platform user groups and gender RQ4 asked, how, if at all, gender influences why and how Facebook+Instagram users and Facebook+ Pinterest users use Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest), in terms of motivation, consumption emotions, and temporal orientations, respectively. Factoring the influence of gender, the following interaction effects were detected in motivations for visual social media use, consumption emotions felt when using visual social media, and temporal orientations during visual social media use. Statistically significant findings are reported next. Motivations Significant interaction effects of social media platform user groups (Facebook+Instagram users vs. Facebook+Pinterest users) and gender were detected on different motivations for visual social media use (Instagram or Pinterest). Female Facebook+Pinterest users were found to have the strongest

12

Y. JIN ET AL.

motivation to seek information on visual social media (i.e., Pinterest) (F [1, 939] = 10.58, p = .001, par. η2 = .01) (M = 5.07, SE = .08). Consumption emotions Significant interaction effects of social media platform user groups (Facebook+Instagram users vs. Facebook+Pinterest users) and gender were detected on different consumption emotions felt in using visual social media (Instagram or Pinterst). Although male Facebook+Instagram users felt the most romantic love when using Instagram (F [1, 939] = 4.28, p = .039, par. η2 = .01) (M = 3.27, SE = .10), female Facebook+Pinterest users felt the most optimism when using visual social media (i.e., Pinterest) (F [1, 939] = 6.19, p = .013, par. η2 = .01) (M = 4.26, SE = .12). Temporal orientations Significant interaction effects of social media platform user groups (Facebook+Instagram users vs. Facebook+Pinterest users) and gender were detected on temporal orientations when using visual social media (Instagram or Pinterst). Female Facebook+Pinterest users were most future-oriented when using visual social media (i.e., Pinterest) (F [1, 939] = 9.44, p = .0022, par. η2 = .01) (M = 5.61, SE = .09).

Discussion By conducting an online survey using a representative sample of social media users in the United States, we studied how individuals, based on their multiple social media platform usage (Facebook +Instagram users vs. Facebook+Pinterest users), differ in their motivations to use Facebook and visual social media (Instagram or Pinterest), their emotions felt when using these platforms, as well as their temporal orientations during their experiences with different platforms. The results provide implications for social media stakeholder engagement theory development, as well as practical insights for organizations to develop cross-platform strategies by understanding which social media platforms and which social media user groups might be most optimal, according to stakeholder motivations, targeted media consumption emotions, and whether the stakeholders are past-, present-, or future-oriented during their social media use. Platform combination predicts group differences in Facebook use Although all survey participants are Facebook users, our findings indicate that multiple platform user group (Facebook+Instagram users vs. Facebook+Pinterest users) is associated with different Facebook use experience. Compared to Facebook+Pinterest users, Facebook+Instagram users tend to use Facebook more to seek self-status and to seek information. In support of the literature (e.g., Papacharissi & Mendelson, 2011; Park et al., 2009), the findings show that Facebook provides users with opportunities to obtain information and for self-expression. These motives are even more evident when the users are able to use Instagram to fulfill other social media-related needs, such as to interact and stay in contact with others, to gain popularity through specific features offered on Instagram, among others (Sheldon & Bryant, 2016). On the other hand, Facebook+Pinterest users demonstrate different perceptions and expectations toward their Facebook use. As the U&G approach suggests, people purposively select media and consume media content to gratify their needs or wants (Katz et al., 1974); each medium has unique forms of motivational dimensions underlying the usage (McQuail, 1983). These findings add important insights into the link between gratifications and media selection across different platforms and platform combinations in a synthesized fashion. Platform combination predicts group differences in visual social media use Compared with Facebook-Pinterest users, Facebook-Instagram users also exhibit stronger consumption emotions in anger, discontent, worry, sadness, fear, shame, and romantic love during Facebook


13

use. This corresponds to previous research findings that time spent, self-representation, and ambiguous information lead Facebook users to have negative emotions (Chen & Lee, 2013; Muise et al., 2009; Tandoc et al., 2015). Particularly Facebook and Instagram are self-profile and status-sharing driven, motivating users to have higher self-representation and increased comparison with their friends, which can induce negative emotions while they interact with friends by posting, sharing, and commenting information (Tandoc et al., 2015). Facebook+Instagram users tend to use visual social media (i.e., Instagram) more to socialize, to get entertained, and to seek self-status. The findings render advanced understanding of how stakeholders engage with Instagram. Similar to Sheldon and Bryant’s (2016) findings, users likely use Instagram for keeping up with what others are doing, for gratifying the need to belong, and for satisfying the need for self-promotion. In addition, the current study discovered that users expect to get entertaining experiences on Instaragm (Mull & Lee, 2014). They also exhibit stronger consumption emotions in anger, discontent, worry, sadness, fear, shame, envy, loneliness, and romantic love during their visual social media (i.e., Instagram) use. They are predominantly past-orientated when using visual social media (i.e., Instagram). It seems that Instagram is a social media platform satisfies the need for nostalgia feelings, certainty assurance, emotion expression, and staying in touch with what is going on in one’s online social circle, as well as maintaining one’s status as presented on social media. Facebook+Pinterest users tend to use visual social media (i.e., Pinterest) more to seek information. They are more future-orientated when using visual social media (i.e., Pinterest). This indicates that Facebook users who use Pinterest are more focused on making plans for the future. In light of that, our findings correspond to Gilbreah’s (2014) report that Pinterest is less of a social network but “more of a content discovery platform that happens to have some social elements” or “a search platform” (p. 113), in contrast to Facebook where users are in the mindset of seeing what others are up to. As Pinterest provides users with a storage space where they can share collections of images related to their interests and/or future purchases, they are likely to use the site for seeking inspiration, finding new ideas, and exploring new things (Mull & Lee, 2014; Ottoni et al., 2013). Indeed, Pinterest users actively look for useful and inspirational ideas on the platform, with very little conversation with other users and little “user-generated content” as the vast majority of pins in one’s Pinterest feed are content repinned from other source (Gilbreah, 2014). Nevertheless, engaging pins spread virally and engaging content benefits from such a viral effect. On Pinterest, one sees a post and pin (or repin) it in order to save the content for later reference, the act of which automatically shares the pin for one’s followers to see (Gilbreah, 2014). As Gilbreath further pointed out, when people use Pinterest, they are “in a planning mindset and actively looking for ideas and inspiration” (p. 113). Gender stakeholder groups’ differences in social media use Factoring in gender and compared to Facebook+Instagram users, females who use Facebook and Pinterest tend to use visual social media platform (i.e., Pinterest) more heavily for the purpose of information seeking than their male counterparts. The findings add another layer of insight to what has been documented in Ottoni et al. (2013) study on gender differences in the way users engage with Pinterest. In addition, these female Facebook+Pinterest users feel more optimism (feeling optimistic, encouraged, and hopeful) and are more future-planning oriented in using visual social media platform. It seems that female Facebook+Pinterest users are actively seeking information to make plans that make them feel hopeful and optimistic. In addition, it is interesting to note that males who use Facebook and Instagram were found to demonstrate the highest felt romantic love when using Instragram in this study, given that females are documented in the literature as more likely to use social media for sharing romantic pictures and information and for relational maintenance (Barker, 2009; Peluchette & Karl, 2008). Taken together, the motivation, temporal orientation, and consumption emotion patterns revealed in this study, centering on Pinterest usage,

14

Y. JIN ET AL.

corresponds nicely with Gilbreah’s (2014) and Anderson’s (2015) Pinterest user profile that young female, early adopters of technology and projects, which also echoes with Phillips, Miller, and McQuarrie’s (2014) finding that Pinterest attracts and motivates young females to use the platform to search information for themselves. Implications for strategic communication Built upon what social media strategy related research has been done in the strategic communication and social media fields, our study responds to the call posited by the trend of individuals’ multiplatform adoption and engagement on social media. Our findings provide meaningful and useful implications, both theoretically and practically, for organizations to compare social media users who use different social media platforms simultaneously to interact with organizations, demonstrating different preferences when it comes to social media use motivations, emotions and temporal orientations. From a stakeholder-centric perspective, these cognitive, affective, and behavioral indicators of stakeholders’ social media engagement are essential for organizations to make optimal decisions on where and how to communicate with stakeholders in a complex, multiplatform social media arena. Theoretical implications Our findings, using a representative adult sample, provide more generalizable insights than previous social media U&G studies based on college student samples (e.g., Cheung et al., 2011; Park et al., 2009). In addition to furthering the study of social media U&G across different social media platforms, our study integrates other important aspects of social media stakeholder engagement, namely, consumption emotions and temporal orientations, the concepts flourished in marketing and consumer research yet understudied in strategic communication literature when it comes to integrating audience research and media channel strategy that matches the psychological and behavioral preferences based on individual differences. The profiles and key features identified among Facebook+Instagram users vs. Facebook+Pinterest users provide empirical evidences that organizations can use to tailor their communication strategies and stakeholder-engaging messages in different platforms. For instance, if an organization aims at evoking the sense of hope and optimism via communications, Pinterest might be a more effective platform than Instagram. In contrast, if the communication activities are based on prestige and peer pressure, Instagram might be a more reasonable choice for social media campaign. Pinterest seems to be an ideal platform for information seeking and future planning. Therefore, if an organization wishes to launch a social media campaign to engage stakeholders with their future plans and encourage self-motivated information seeking, Pinterest is likely to be a strategic social media platform choice. Practical implications Our findings provide practical insights for strategic communication practitioners, especially in the practice areas of brand promotion and communication management. The key argument here is that the understanding of stakeholders’ motivations, emotions, and temporal orientation in social media use is more than studying the social media platforms per se. It involves building connections between consumer psychology and social media platform-specific characteristics in strategic communication decision making process, which is of essence to stakeholder-centric approaches to advertising, marketing, and public relations, etc. Strategic social media recommendations should be based on stakeholder characteristics, including their psychological and behavioral tendencies demonstrated in different media environments. As brand managers wrestle with the need to follow their customers onto new digital platforms in an effort to drive brand preference and purchase, they should be aware of how these platforms are used differently. Broadly speaking, our research findings suggest that, among Facebook users,


15

whether they use their Instagram and Pinterest reflects different audience mindsets. Organizations, therefore, are more effective in reaching the same customers when they are in different mindsets. A brand such as Nike, for example, may choose Instagram in order to link itself to the status-seeking nature of its target audience. The brand may post a photo of an NBA athlete wearing its shoes onto Instagram. In addition, since our research suggests that Instagram is more linked to self-status seeking and re-enforcing past experiences, the Nike brand may launch a campaign that encourages a customer to share an Instagram photo of her wearing its shoes after running a marathon. Pinterest, on the other hand, offers an opportunity for brands to connect with customers when they are thinking about the future and seeking information. The Nike brand communication team may see more success on a platform such as Pinterest by sharing, say, tips for training for a marathon. This type of information, presented when and where customers are closer to changing behavior, has potential to earn brand awareness, trial and repeat at a time when people are just beginning to purchase products in a category. This aspect of Pinterest—helping customers by offering useful information—has been shown by Puligadda, DelVecchio, and Gilbreath’s (2014) study to have a significant impact on purchase intention. In both cases, Instagram and Pinterest offer media channels that may be more effective at bringing specific brand communication strategies to life. Brands should begin their journey onto these platforms by starting with their general strategic communication strategy, and let digital platform decisions follow. In addition, organizations targeting at female household planners and decision makers need to consider Pinterest as an important media platform. According to Gilbreah (2014), currently, the top categories that see the largest repin and click activities on Pinterest are food, fashion, fitness, beauty, décor, crafts, travel, weddings, babies and children. Companies and brands in these sectors should seize the opportunities of using Pinterest to facilitate users’ future planning with stronger optimism and more efficient information seeking on the platform. Limitations and future directions This study has several limitations that need to be further addressed in future research. First, we only used social media user sample in the United States. The results thus only apply to U.S.-based Facebook+Instagram and Facebook+Pinterest users. Future studies should examine how individuals use other popular social media platforms and platform combinations differently in different countries (e.g., Snapchat, WeChat, etc.). Second, this study only compared visual social media based on Facebook users. The associations and even cause-effect between different social media platforms and user experiences need to be further explored. Third, although statistically significant results provide insight and subtlety in comparing social media users’ platform uses, the overall low mean scores seem to suggest a low user engagement on Facebook, Instagram and Pinterest. What this observation means for strategic communicators needs further exploration. Fourth, in addition to gender differences, social media use differences among various demographic groups need to be examined. Important influencers, as Perrin (2015) indicated in the social media usage survey, include age differences, socio-economic differences, racial and ethnic similarities, and community differences. Last but not least, this study focuses only on the regular media consumption aspect of strategic communication with implications for organization-stakeholder engagement during noncrisis situations. Future studies need to examine whether and how stakeholders’ social media platform use motivations, emotions, and temporal orientations might vary in times of crisis, the insights from which will provide a fuller toolbox for organizations to prioritize and maneuver at all practice areas of strategic communication. Over time, digital platforms and the use of combined social media platforms evolve as different features are added, new users come onto the platforms, and social norms arise. E-mail, for example, was first used mainly for friend and family communication. However, it evolved over time to become much more dominated by strategic communication. More recently, Facebook is use is shifting away from a communication tool used by teens and families to a site for more “serious” topics such as

16

Y. JIN ET AL.

current events news and government alerts. By repeating this study over time, we may be able to chart how users’ social media consumption habits change—and allow strategic communication managers to understand how they, too, should evolve with their stakeholders.

References Al-Deen, H. S. N., & Hendricks, J. A. (2013). Social media and strategic communications. London, UK: Palgrave MacMillan. Anderson, M. (August 28, 2015). Men catch up with women on overall social media use. Pew Research Center. Retrived from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/08/28/men-catch-up-with-women-on-overall-social-media-use/ Avery, E., Lariscy, R., & Sweetser, K. D. (2010). Social media and shared—Or divergent—Uses? A coorientation analysis of public relations practitioners and journalists. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 4, 189– 205. Avery, E. J., & Graham, M. W. (2013). Political public relations and the promotion of participatory, transparent government through social media. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 7, 274–291. Barker, V. (2009). Older adolescents’ motivations for social network site use: The influence of gender, group identity, and collective self-esteem. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 12(2), 209–213. Bergadaa, M. M. (1990). The role of time in the action of the consumer. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(3), 289–302. Berger, J., & Iyengar, R. (2013). Communication channels and word of mouth: How the medium shapes the message. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3), 567–579. Bolton, R. N., Parasuraman, A., Hoefnagels, A., Migchels, N., Kabadayi, S., Gruber, T., . . . Solnet, D. (2013). Understanding Generation Y and their use of social media: A review and research agenda. Journal of Service Management, 24(3), 245–267. Bond, B. J. (2009). He posted, she posted: Gender differences in self-disclosure on social networking sites. Rocky Mountain Communication Review, 6(2), 29–37. Botha, E., & Reyneke, M. (2013). To share or not to share: The role of content and emotion in viral marketing. Journal of Public Affairs, 13(2), 160–171. Chang, H. H., & Pham, M. T. (2013). Affect as a decision-making system of the present. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(1), 42–63. Chen, W., & Lee, K.-H. (2013). Sharing, liking, commenting, and distressed? The pathway between Facebook interaction and psychological distress. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(10), 728–734. Cheung, C. M., Chiu, P. Y., & Lee, M. K. (2011). Online social networks: Why do students use facebook? Computers in Human Behavior, 27(4), 1337–1343. Dora, L. D. (2013). Looking back: Instagram in numbers. Brandwatch Blog. Retrieved from https://www.brandwatch. com/2013/12/3-years-of-instagram-infographic/ Duggan, M., Ellison, N. B., Lampe, C., Lenhart, A., & Madden, M. (2015, January 9). Social Media Update 2014. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/09/social-media-update-2014/ Ellsworth, P. C., & Smith, C. A. (1988). Shades of joy: Patterns of appraisal differentiating pleasant emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 2(4), 221–301. Gilbert, E., Bakhshi, S., Chang, S., & Terveen, L. (2013). “I need to try this!”: A statistical overview of Pinterest. Proceedings from the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Paris, France. Gilbreah, B. (2014). Thinking differently about Pinterest. Journal of Digital & Social Media Marketing, 2(2), 110–117. Griskevicius, V., Shiota, M. N., & Nowlis, S. M. (2010). The many shades of rose-colored glasses; An evolutionary approach to the influence of different positive emotions. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 238–250. Hanson, G., & Haridakis, P. (2008). YouTube users watching and sharing the news: A uses and gratifications approach. Journal of Electronic Publishing, 11(3), 6. Hoch, S. J., & Loewenstein, G. F. (1991). Time-in-consistent preferences and consumer self-control. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 492–506. Hunt, D., Atkin, D., & Krishnan, A. (2012). The influence of computer-mediated communication apprehension on motives for Facebook use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(2), 187–202. Jacoby, H., Szybillo, G. J., & Berning, C. K. (1976). Time and consumer behavior: An interdisciplinary overview. Journal of Consumer Research, 2(4), 320–339. Jin, Y., Austin, L., Guidry, J., & Parrish, C. (in press). Picture this and take that: Strategic crisis visuals and visual social media (VSM) in crisis communication. In S. Duhé (Ed.), New media and public relations (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing Group. Joiner, R., Gavin, J., Duffield, J., Brosnan, M., Crook, C., Durndell, A., . . . Lovatt, P. (2005). Gender, Internet identification, and Internet anxiety: Correlates of Internet use. Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 8(4), 371–378. Kaplan, R., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68.


17

Katz, E. (1959). Mass communication research and the study of popular culture: An editorial note on a possible future for this journal. Studies in Public Communications, 2, 1–6. Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Uses and gratifications research. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 509–523. Kim, J.-N., & Grunig, J. E. (2011). Problem solving and communicative action: A situational theory of problem solving. Journal of Communication, 61(1), 120–149. Kramer, A. D. I. (2012). The spread of emotion via Facebook. Chi-Conference, 1, 767–770. Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and Adaptation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Lee, J. K., & Hansen, S. S. (2013). Advertising in social network games: How consumers persuasion knowledge and advertiser sincerity impact eWOM of marketer-generated messages. In H. S. N. Al-Deen, & J. A. Hendricks (Eds.), Social media and strategic communications (pp. 3–14). London, UK: Palgrave MacMillan. Lunden, I. (2013). Pinterest launches its first API, and it’s all about big brands: Zappos, Walmart, Disney in first user group. Retrieved from http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/14/pinterest-launches-its-first-apis-partners-with-zappos-wal mart-disney-nestle-random-house-hearst-on-first-rollout Macnamara, J., & Zerfass, A. (2012). Social media communication in organizations: The challenges of balancing openness, strategy, and management. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 6, 287–308. Mayers-Levy, J., & Maheswaran, D. (1992). When timing matters: The influence of temporal distance on consumers’ affective and persuasive responses. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 424–433. McCorkindale, T. (2012). Follow me or be my friend: How organizations are using Twitter and Facebook to build relationships and to communicate transparently and authentically. In S. Duhe (Ed.), New media and public relations (2nd ed., pp. 67–74). New York, NY: Peter Lang. McQuail, D. (1983). Mass Communication Theory. London, UK : Sage Publications. Mogilner, C., Aaker, J., & Kamvar, S. D. (2012). How happiness affects choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(2), 429–443. Muise, A., Christofides, E., & Desmarais, S. (2009). More information than you ever wanted: Does Facebook bring out the green-eyed monster of jealousy? Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 12(4), 441–444. Mull, I. R., & Lee, S. (2014). “PIN” pointing the motivational dimensions behind Pinterest. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 192–200. Ottoni, R., Pesce, J. P., Las Casas, D. B., Franciscani, G., Jr, Meira, W., Jr, Kumaraguru, P., & Almeida, V. (2013, July). Ladies first: Analyzing gender roles and behaviors in Pinterest. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, July 8–11, 2013. Published by The AAAI Press, Palo Alto, California, USA. Papacharissi, Z., & Mendelson, A. (2011). Toward a new(er) sociability: Uses, gratifications and social capital on Facebook. In S. Papathanassopoulos (Ed.), Media perspectives for the 21st century (pp. 212–230). London, UK: Routledge. Papacharissi, Z., & Rubin, A. M. (2000). Predictors of Internet use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 44(2), 175–196. Park, N., Kee, K. F., & Valenzuela, S. (2009). Being immersed in social networking environment: Facebook groups, uses and gratifications, and social outcomes. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 12(6), 729–733. Peluchette, J., & Karl, K. (2008). Social networking profiles: An examination of student attitudes regarding use and appropriateness of content. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 11(1), 95–97. Perrin, A. (2015, October 8). Social media usage: 2005-2015. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www. pewinternet.org/2015/10/08/social-networking-usage-2005-2015/ Phillips, B. J., Miller, J., & McQuarrie, E. F. (2014). Dreaming out loud on Pinterest: New forms of indirect persuasion. International Journal of Advertising, 33(4), 633–655. Puligadda, S., DelVecchio, D., & Gilbreath, B. (2014). ‘Meaningful marketing’: A process investigation of how consumers reward noninterruptive, nonpersuasive marketing communication. Journal of Marketing Communications, 20(5), 325–338. Richins, M. L. (1997). Measuring emotions in the consumption experience. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(2), 127– 146. Ruggiero, T. E. (2000). Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass Communication & Society, 3(1), 3–37. Sashittal, H. C., & Jassawalla, A. R. (2015). Why do college students use Pinterest? A model and implications for scholars and marketers. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 15(1), 54–66. Schwartz, H. A., Park, G., Sap, M., Weingarten, E., Eichstaedt, J., Kern, M., . . . Ungar, L. (2015). Extracting Human Temporal Orientation in Facebook Language. In Proceedings of the 2015 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics-Human Language Technologies, Denver, CO: NAACL. Sedereviciute, K., & Valentini, C. (2011). Towards a more holistic stakeholder analysis approach: Mapping known and undiscovered stakeholders from social media. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 5, 221–239. Settanni, M., & Marengo, D. (2015). Sharing feelings online: Studying emotional well-being via automated text analysis of Facebook posts. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1–7.

18

Y. JIN ET AL.

Shao, G. (2009). Understanding the appeal of user-generated media: A uses and gratification perspective. Internet Research, 19(1), 7–25. Sheldon, P. (2008). Student favorite: Facebook and motives for its use. Southwestern Mass Communication Journal, 23 (2), 39–55. Sheldon, P. (2009). Maintain or develop new relationships? Gender differences in Facebook use. Rocky Mountain Communication Review, 6(1), 51–56. Sheldon, P., & Bryant, K. (2016). Instagram: Motives for its use and relationship to narcissism and contextual age. Computers in Human Behavior, 58, 89–97. Shin, J., Gatithers, H., Lee, S., Graham, M., & Hendricks, N. (2013). The current trends in social media usage at corporations: Analysis of Facebook fan pages of Fortune 500 companies. In H. S. N. Al-Deen, & J. A. Hendricks (Eds.), Social media and strategic communications (pp. 62–79). London, UK: Palgrave MacMillan. Sleasforce Research. (2016, March30). State of marketing: Trends and insights from nearly 4,000 marketing leaders worldwide. Salesforce. Retrieved from https://www.salesforce.com/blog/2016/03/state-of-marketing-2016.html Smock, A. D., Ellison, N. B., Lampe, C., & Wohn, D. (2011). Facebook as a toolkit: A uses and gratification approach to unbundling feature use. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 2322–2329. Sweetser, K. D., & Kelleher, T. (2011). A survey of social media use, motivation and leadership among public relations practitioners. Public Relations Review, 37(4), 425–428. Tandoc, E. C., Jr., Ferrucci, P., & Duffy, M. (2015). Facebook use, envy, and depression among college students: Is facebooking depressing? Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 139–146. Wang, Z., Tchernev, J. M., & Solloway, T. (2012). A dynamic longitudinal examination of social media use, needs, and gratifications among college students. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1829–1839. Watkins, B. A., & Lewis, R. (2013). Twitter as gateway to relationship bulding marketing: A content analysis of relationship building via Twitter. In H. S. N. Al-Deen, & J. A. Hendricks (Eds.), Social media and strategic communications (pp. 25–44). London, UK: Palgrave MacMillan. Westbrook, R. A., & Oliver, R. L. (1991). The dimensionality of consumption emotion patterns and consumer satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(1), 84–91. Whiting, A., & Williams, D. (2013). Why people use social media: A uses and gratifications approach. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 16(4), 362–369. Williams, P. (2014). Emotions and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(5), viii–xi. Winterich, K. P., & Haws, K. L. (2011). Helpful hopefulness: The effect of future positive emotions on consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(3), 505–524. Zignani, M., Esfandyari, A., Gaito, S., & Rossi, G. (2016). Walls-in-one: Usage and temporal patterns in a social media aggregator. Applied Network Science, 1(5), 1–24.