Read the paper here: http://vitak.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/vitak-cscw2014-distance.pdf Abstract: The increasing ubiquity of information and communication technologies has dramatically impacted interpersonal communication and relationship maintenance processes. These technologies remove temporal and spatial constraints, enabling communication at a distance for low to no physical costs. Research has established that technologies such as email supplement other forms of communication in relationship maintenance, but to what extent do newer technologies—which contain a unique set of affordances—facilitate these processes? Furthermore, do SNS users engage in different practices through the site and obtain different relational benefits based on specific characteristics of the tie? Findings from a survey of adult Facebook users (N=415) indicate that geographically distant Facebook Friends, as well as those who rely on the site as their primary form of communication, engage in relationship maintenance strategies through the site to a greater extent and perceive the site to have a more positive impact on the quality of their relationships.

1. Facebook Makes the Heart Grow Fonder:
Relationship Maintenance Strategies Among
Geographically Dispersed and
Communication-Restricted Connections
Jessica Vitak
College of Information Studies
University of Maryland
jvitak@umd.edu | @jvitak
jessicavitak.com/cv
Credit: Norebbo

2. Credit: Photos_by_Lis
Why relationship maintenance matters
2
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

3. But being near friends isn’t always easy…
3

4. 4

5. Ways to connect distant ties
What do we mean by
“distant,” anyway?
Letters (pen pals!)
Phone (landline, mobile,
texts)
Text-based CMC (email, IM)
Video-based CMC (Skype,
Google Hangouts)
Social network sites
5

6. “I suspect that Facebook’s one great
contribution has been to slow down that
rate of relationship decay by allowing
us to keep in touch with friends over long
distances.”
--Robin Dunbar (2011, p. 83)
6
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

7. How are people using Facebook to maintain
relationships with different types of social ties?
Is Facebook merely a supplement to to other forms
of communication, or does it enhance relational
quality for certain types of relationship?
7
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

8. Facebook Profile
Layout
October 2012
Participants were asked to
log into site, go to their
profile and select Friend in
top left position.
They entered name of
person into a survey field.
Questions were then
tailored to the selected
Friend (e.g., Closeness
item: “John and I have a
strong connection”).
8
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

9. Why use this method?
 Major weakness of
relationship
maintenance research is
limited focus on strong
tie relationships.
 Many Facebook
relationships are weak
ties.
 Furthermore, many
Facebook relationships
span significant
geographic distance.
Dibble et al. (2012) Unidimensional Relationship Closeness Scale
9
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

10. Reported Geographic Distance Between Friends
(estimated driving distance)
150
# of respondents
120
90
60
30
M=3.13 (2+ hour drive)
SD=2.05
0
<30 mins 30-60min
1-2hr
2-4hr
34% of
sample
4-6hr
6+hr
28% of
sample
10
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

11. Weak ties who live
very far apart
Strong ties
who live
near each
other
11
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

12. Facebook Relationship Maintenance
 Supportive Communication (7 items): behaviors signaling social
& emotional support; social grooming behaviors
 Shared Interests (7 items): interactions on site surrounding
shared likes, activities, etc. (e.g., TV show, sports team)
 Passive Consumption (4 items): browsing Friend’s content
without direct interaction
 Social Information Seeking (5 items): mundane communication
+ discovering new things about Friend
12
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

13. Facebook’s Impact on
Relational Quality
Two new measures assessed the extent to which Facebook
users felt their use of Facebook impacted their relationship
with a specific Friend:
1.Facebook’s Impact on Relational Closeness (5 items):
Facebook helps me understand (person’s name) better.
Facebook has positively impacted my relationship with (person’s name).
2.Facebook’s Impact on Relational Stability (4 items):
Without Facebook, (person’s name) and I would fall out of touch.
Facebook plays an important role in maintaining my relationship with
(person’s name).
13
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

14. RQ1: Examining variance in communication
frequency based on geographic proximity
14
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

15. Facebook-Specific
Communication Frequency
Non-Facebook
Communication Frequency
T-tests with ANCOVAs controlling for relational closeness
4
3
2
1
0
Face-to-Face
*
Phone Calls
*
Texting
*
Email
*
IM
*
Skype
*
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Private
Messages
Nearby Friends
Wall Posts
Far Away Friends
Like Content
15
Comment
Visit Profile
Browse Photos
* Statistically Significant Difference (t-test)

16. H1 & H2:
Geographic proximity, relationship
maintenance, & Facebook’s impact on
relational quality
16
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

17. Extent to which they agreed with statements about
behaviors/outcomes (1-5 Likert type scale)
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
Supportive
Communication
Nearby Friends
Shared Interests
Far Away Friends
Passive
Consumption
17
Social Information
Seeking
FB Impact on
Closeness
FB Impact on
Stability
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

18. H3 & H4:
Facebook as primary form of communication,
relationship maintenance, & Facebook’s impact
on relational quality
18
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

19. How do you operationalize
Facebook as the primary
form of communication
between a dyad?
 Want high engagement in
Facebook communication
(e.g., posting on wall,
commenting on updates) and
low engagement in all other
forms of communication
(e.g., face-to-face, phone,
email)
21.8% of
responses
 Final variable included
12.8% of participants with
TradComm scores below
2.25 & FBComm scores
above 3.
19
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

20. Extent to which they agreed with statements about
behaviors/outcomes (1-5 Likert type scale)
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
Supportive
Communication
Shared Interests
Passive
Consumption
Social Information
Seeking
FB Impact on
Closeness
FB Impact on
Stability
Facebook is Not Primary Form of Communication
Facebook is Primary Form of Communication
20
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

21. But what’s it all mean?
Use of Facebook for relationship maintenance—
and perceived relational benefits—vary by context
 Suggested supplemental role of Facebook for closer
(geographically & emotionally speaking) ties
 Potential for enhancing role for weaker connections &
keeping relationships from fading away
See Vitak (2012): Keeping
Connected in the Facebook
Age
21
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

22. But what’s it all mean?
Facebook as a “virtual rolodex”
 Role of affordances
 Reduced transaction costs
 Benefits of masspersonal communication
Media multiplexity considerations
 Is Facebook one or multiple
communication channels?
 How do newer communication
technologies reshape our understanding of
media multiplexity?
22
Credit: arahinvegas
#cscw2014 | @jvitak

23. Design Implications
Encourage interactions between users after a profile visit
Predicting Friends a user will want to interact with in the
future
Look at interaction patterns with mutual friends
Customize News Feed content
Focus on ways to not
be creepy when
encouraging interaction
23

24. Thanks!
Jessica Vitak
University of Maryland’s iSchool
Email: jvitak@umd.edu | Twitter: @jvitak
Find this paper at jessicavitak.com/cv
This project was part of my dissertation research, so a big shout-out to my graduate advisor,
Nicole Ellison, for her Yoda-like wisdom on the project.
24
#cscw2014 | @jvitak