Although Facebook is the largest social network site in the U.S. and attracts an increasingly diverse userbase, some individuals have chosen not to join the site. Using survey data collected from a sample of non-academic staff at a large Midwestern university (N=614), we explore the demographic and cognitive factors that predict whether a person chooses to join Facebook. We find that older adults and those with higher perceived levels of bonding social capital are less likely to use the site. Analyzing open-ended responses from non-users, we find that they express concerns about privacy, context collapse, limited time, and channel effects in deciding to not adopt Facebook. Finally, we compare non-adopters against users who differ on three dimensions of use. We find that light users often have social capital outcomes similar to, or worse than, non-users, and that heavy users report higher perceived bridging and bonding social capital than either group. To view the paper: http://vitak.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/lampe_vitak_ellison-2013-cscw.pdf

1. Users and Nonusers:
Interactions between Levels of
Facebook Adoption and Social Capital
Cliff Lampe (@clifflampe)
Jessica Vitak (@jvitak)
Nicole Ellison (@nicole_ellison)
#CSCW2013 | Lampe, Vitak, & Ellison | Users & Nonusers | @clifflampe @jvitak @nicole_ellison

2. In what ways are Facebook users
and non-users different, and how
are heavy users distinct from
light users?
#CSCW2013 | Lampe, Vitak, & Ellison | Users & Nonusers | @clifflampe @jvitak @nicole_ellison

3. Technology Adoption
“…in general, the disparity in effort and benefit works
against acceptance in many situations.” (Grudin, 1994)
Flickr: ciaoamore

4. Method
 Random sample of 2150 non-faculty university staff
 614 responses (29% response rate)
 134 participants were non-users (22% of sample)
 Instrument included validated scales & open-ended
item (for non-users)
#CSCW2013 | Lampe, Vitak, & Ellison | Users & Nonusers | @clifflampe @jvitak @nicole_ellison

5. In what ways are Facebook users and
non-users different?
Binary logistic regression (predicting use of Facebook)
revealed differences in:
1. Age
2. Bonding Social Capital
3. Facebook Usefulness
No differences in sex, ethnicity, education, weekly Internet use,
Internet efficacy, self-esteem, or bridging social capital
#CSCW2013 | Lampe, Vitak, & Ellison | Users & Nonusers | @clifflampe @jvitak @nicole_ellison

6. Social Capital
Flickr: HarlanH

7. Facebook Usefulness
Flickr: CapCase

8. What are non-users’ reasons
for not joining Facebook?
Time: “I believe it is a huge waste of time and it takes
away from productivity in the workplace.”
Impersonal: “I prefer talking face to face or on the phone.
My personal friends deserve a private conversation.”
Privacy concerns: “Even with the privacy guards in
place, people can stalk you from your friends’ sites.”
Context collapse: “too much overlap between work and
personal life on Facebook”
Lack of interest: “[I] don't see how it could add value to
my life.”
#CSCW2013 | Lampe, Vitak, & Ellison | Users & Nonusers | @clifflampe @jvitak @nicole_ellison

9. How are heavy users
distinct from light users?
Time on Site Interaction on Site Network Composition
#CSCW2013 | Lampe, Vitak, & Ellison | Users & Nonusers | @clifflampe @jvitak @nicole_ellison

10. Signals of Relational Investment
Flickr: Spencer77

11. Actual Friends
#CSCW2013 | Lampe, Vitak, & Ellison | Users & Nonusers | @clifflampe @jvitak @nicole_ellison

12. ANOVA Findings: Age
55
Non-user
Light user
50 Heavy user
45
Age
40
35
SRI Time Friends
#CSCW2013 | Lampe, Vitak, & Ellison | Users & Nonusers | @clifflampe @jvitak @nicole_ellison

13. ANOVA Findings: Facebook Usefulness
4.3 Non-user
4.1 Light user
Facebook Usefulness
3.9 Heavy user
3.7
3.5
3.3
3.1
2.9
SRI Time Friends
#CSCW2013 | Lampe, Vitak, & Ellison | Users & Nonusers | @clifflampe @jvitak @nicole_ellison

14. ANOVA Findings: Bridging Social Capital
4.1
Non-user
4 Light user
Bridging Social Capital
3.9 Heavy user
3.8
3.7
3.6
3.5
3.4
SRI Time Friends
#CSCW2013 | Lampe, Vitak, & Ellison | Users & Nonusers | @clifflampe @jvitak @nicole_ellison

15. ANOVA Findings: Bonding Social Capital
3.9 Non-user
3.8 Light user
3.7 Heavy user
Bonding Social Capital
3.6
3.5
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.1
SRI Time Friends
#CSCW2013 | Lampe, Vitak, & Ellison | Users & Nonusers | @clifflampe @jvitak @nicole_ellison

16. Discussion
 Membership does not appear sufficient to garner
benefits associated with use of SNSs
 Users must actively engage with the site & their
network to reap rewards
 Unpacking reasons why some people choose to
forgo using the site
#CSCW2013 | Lampe, Vitak, & Ellison | Users & Nonusers | @clifflampe @jvitak @nicole_ellison

17. Take aways
Usefulness is an important frame by
which non-users of Facebook express
their motivations.
How one uses Facebook is strongly
associated with social capital outcomes.
#CSCW2013 | Lampe, Vitak, & Ellison | Users & Nonusers | @clifflampe @jvitak @nicole_ellison

18. Moving forward
What features or social processes can
Facebook implement to improve users’
literacy and site engagement?
#CSCW2013 | Lampe, Vitak, & Ellison | Users & Nonusers | @clifflampe @jvitak @nicole_ellison

19. Thanks!
Please address all questions to the intimidating
Superman-lookalike in the audience. He won’t bite.
Probably not, at least.
This research was funded in part by NSF Grant #0916019: HCC: Small: The role
of social network sites in facilitating collaborative processes.
#CSCW2013 | Lampe, Vitak, & Ellison | Users & Nonusers | @clifflampe @jvitak @nicole_ellison